Brannigan's Law

I have my first Jury Trial scheduled for next week, July 9th.  This isn't my first scheduled jury trial, as all of my cases have been scheduled for them, but this is the first one that looks like it may actually go to trial.

There are a few factors which would keep it from trial.  I have yet to obtain a full discovery, as there is some video evidence in the police's possession which has not been made available to me yet, and if I don't have that by tomorrow I will be forced to request a continuance.  Also, I have made a fairly generous offer to the prosecutor that they may be willing to take, and if they do, that would also prevent it from a trial.

I am a little excited though, as I sit here and prepare for the worst case senerio, namely that I do end up having to conduct a full trial next week.  I am about done outlining my cross of the officer, who is the only witness for the prosecution, and will start in on a voir dire prep next.  My direct will be of my client, and it should be short and sweet, if I even decide to do one.  The jury may hear all it needs to before I get to my case in chief, as so much of my case is  merely rebutting the prosecutions case.

I actually want to do a jury trial, as I think every lawyer should (that really is the essence of the job).  I can't imagine someone going through law school, and all the prep, and never wanting to see the inside of a courtroom.  I know that those people exists, as 90% of my graduating class was comprised of them.  It seems insane to me.  I think this may be what Scalia was talking about in my post from yesterday.  That the system has evolved away from its roots, and as a whole is more considered with other things besides courtroom advocacy. That the system has grown too complex and requires too many of the top minds to run the firms and offices, all while avoiding real lawyering.  At least thats what I'm going to tell myself Scalia meant. 

Not that those other corporate and in house attorney's don't have a place, but when you think about the famous lawyers from the past, the ones that inspire people, and wax poetically, they are all your basic trial attorney.  Clarence Darrow had the Scopes Trial, Thurgood Marshall had Brown v. Board of education, Cicero had his Ancient Roman Murder Trial (ok, I may be the only one inspired by Cicero).  Even the movies have a pro-trial attorney spin.  Atticus Finch presenting his closing argument is meant to inspire, while corporate attorney's are villified in movies like The Firm and Devil's Advocate.

It's always the trial attorney who fights the fat cats and corporate pollution, like in A Civil Action, or Rules of Engagement.  Hell, even in a Few Good Men, Tom Cruise is portrayed as a kin to the local main street lawyer, while Kevin Bacon is at heart a company man. 

All I'm saying is that the Trial by Jury is the heart and soul of the legal profession, and the desire to perform at least one should be present in anyone who wishes to tackle the job.  Being a lawyer who doesn't want to conduct a trial is like being a Doctor too afraid to open a patient up.  I don't want put my life in the hands of someone to scared to go all the way in treating me.

So, mere moments after posting my anti-lawyer joke tirade, I pop on over to the Law Blog (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/) and see this quote from Justice Scalia:

Scalia also reiterated his feeling, expressed in other interviews, that too many of the best minds in the U.S. are wasting away in law. “I think that any system that requires that many of the country’s best minds, and they are the best minds, is too complex,” he said. “If you look at the figures, where does the top of the class in college go to? It goes into law. They don’t go into teaching. Now I love the law, there is nothing I would rather do. But it doesn’t produce anything.”

Wow.  As someone who went into law, and cannot ever be considered one of the nations "best minds" (no, I did not graduate from the top of my class, either in college or law school), as well as the fact that I am dating some one who DID graduate near the top of their class, and who DID NOT go into law (she in fact is a teacher),  I don't know what to make of this quote.

I am not a Scalia acolyte as some people on the right, nor am I bitterly anti-Scalia.  I respect him as the superior mind that he is, I think he is very crazy, and I find myself agreeing with more of his opinions than I am comfortable with.  But this. It bothers me.  While I agree with him, based merely on statistical evidence (I recently read the demographic history of Franklin County, and found that in 1953 there were only 15 solo, general practice attorney's in the city of Columbus.  15!  Now, there are well over 1000.)  I agree that the legal profession has grown too large, too rapidly.  I also agree that not enough quality people are drawn to other noble professions like teaching.  However, to say that lawyers don't produce anything?  I know a few people who are not in jail, not convicted felons, and have been reimbursed for bodily injury that might beg to differ.

Has Scalia become that disengaged from the rest of his profession that he has forgotten what 75% of lawyers do on a daily basis?  Now, I would agree with him that HE doesn't produce anything.  The Supreme Court, and most higher appellate courts really don't produce anything of value.   They are the high minded, concept driven aspect of the system.  They are to lawyers as philosophers are to physicists.  They think about this stuff, conjucture amongst themselves about the way it is, and how it should be.  We are down in the trenches dealing with real stuff.

I know I am making being a lawyer sound so very important, and thats why most people don't like lawyers- the arrogance.  But it's not often that you get belittled as a profession by the person AT THE TOP OF IT!

I don't know if you have seen the new commercials with LeBron James in them.  I forget what they are actually advertising, but the premise is that this product gives King James so much energy that he can tackle another court, namely a court of law.  The ad jokes that he has quickly become the best defense council in the state of Ohio.

Well.  Color me a little peeved.  One would have to go to college first, wouldn't they?  Sorry, I'm just bitter he went straight to the Cavs without his obligatory one year at Ohio State.  Snub the Buckeyes, eh? NOT IN OHIO!

On a more serious note - I have a fairly good sense of humor, and I'm not to quick to take myself or my profession too seriously, but this commercial makes me a little uneasy when I see it.  I think that is mainly becasue, as a defense attorney in the state of Ohio, my competitive side is stoked when I hear the suggestion that LeBron could do my job better than me.  I like James, and I think he is a skilled basketball player, and while I don't necsissarily root for the Cavs (go Pacers?), I don't NOT root for them.  But again, lets just let our sports stars stick to sports.  Being able to shoot a critical three doesn't make you good at everything (oops- I guess LeBron is out of that equation then- BURN!).

This actually brings me to my more serious point.  The lawyer joke.  Often times, after just meeting someone, they find out that I am a lawyer.  whether it is them asking what I do, or through some other point in conversation.  Upon hearing this revelation, many people try to tell me a lawyer joke.  Like I have never heard them before.  Not only have I heard them, I don't appreciate them very much.

Example:
Person 1: "Hi, I'm a Loan Specialist for a large bank."
Person 2: "Oh? What do you call a Loan Specialist for a large bank buried neck high in sand?"
Person 1: Saying nothing, quietly mulling over the idea that Person 2 thinks he should be buried alive
Person 2: "NOT ENOUGH SAND!, HA HA HA"
Person 1: "Yes, we in my chosen profession are all large douche-bags, and should all be killed."

SEE? Not fun.  Again, I do have a sense of humor.  I just don't like the subtle implications that it would be a better world if I were to be drowned in the ocean.

I blame our piss poor educational system for this.  Namely - Ninth grade English classes.  There is a famous quote from William Shakespeare's play Henry IV - "First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Ever since then, it has been ok to tell a lawyer, to his face, that he should die.  Thanks Will.
The problem is, is that when we et to learn about the Bard, we learn his most famous quotes, but we learn them out of context.  People actually think Shakespeare was advocating lawyercide as an acceptable social policy.  NOT SO!

For you see - Henry IV is a great play about the forces of democracy overcoming the forces of anarchy.  In it, the speaker of the now famous quote is an anti-establishment rebel.  A terrorist.  The point Bard Willy was trying to make is that the first thing you should do when attempting a radical overthrow of a governing legal system is to kill those best suited to defend justice.  We lawyers are the stewards, the heralds, and the first line of protection to the fragile democracy we all hold so dear.  And they didn't teach you that in school.  So go ahead, make lawyer jokes, but just know this - telling lawyer jokes means the terrorists have won.

Well, I passed the Federal Bar for the Southern District of Ohio.  Thats good, cause after I made fun of it for being easy, I would have a lot of egg on my face if I hadn't.  Anyway, this was just a quickie update, more to come in the future.

AH, I remember being a young roustabout.  I was a hellion in my day, causing all sorts of trouble.  However, I was lucky, in that I was able to escape my adolescence without a record.  I attribute this to my performance and training at the hands of the high school track team, as well as the fortunate position of the local Dough-nut Shop a few blocks away.  I recognize, though, that there are many other scamps who are not as lithe on their toes, and are brought low at the feet of the Juvenile Justice system.  After my recent visits to both the County Juvenile Detention Center, as well as the drug abuse rehabilitation center I have a new take. 

I prided my younger self on my hooliganism.  I wanted to be a punk in the proud tradition of political activism brought forth by The Clash.  Some of these kids though, need serious help.  I have two new clients, poor kids, and it is my job to help them.  I asked them to tell me a little about themselves.  Where they went to school (the last time they decided to go), about their family lives, and how they like to spend their time.  Wow.  I must be the most naive person alive.  I was shocked.  My girlfriend teaches Spanish at a local inner-city high school here in town, and the stories she tells.  I thought I was prepared.

These aren't inner-city kids though.  These are rural kids, growing up near farms and train depots.  They make many journeys into the city though, because the poor and economically depressed share common interests, no matter where they might be.  These seem to be problems that transcend race, and are really rooted in the socio-economic status these kids feel locked into.

I want to help them, but they don't think they need the help.  They don't see any thing wrong with how they are behaving.  They don't think that there is better out there for them, and if there is, they don't want it.  They wear their crimes like a badge of pride.  One even joked that kids like him are how people like me stay in business.  It's sick, but it might be true.  Statistically, when there is an economic downturn, the crime rates spike, as more and more desperate people are pushed into situations where they feel hopeless.  It's also times like these that the court system becomes clogged with defendants, many of whom can't afford their own attorney.  So the judge appoints a young guy like me to help them.  It is a boon in work and pay for me.  And that makes me feel like one of the social parasites that only turn up in lawyers jokes. 

I find it hard to rationalize sometimes by saying "well, we are providing them a service, we are helping them et through the system with the minimum amount of punishment, and we are striving to get them the help that they need, turning them into productive members of society."  I find that hard, because, how much of a service am I providing?  Some of these kids have been in and out of the system for longer than I was in law school.  Some have been gaming the system their whole lives.  They could teach ME a thing or two.  What service do I provide them?

Well, I didn't start out wanting to write such a jaded post.  Sorry about that.  Maybe tomorrow I will have some great Clarence Darrow moment and see the good in all this.  Heres to hope.

I took the Federal Bar Exam for the Southern District of Ohio yesterday.  Ohio, in all its wonder and glory is one of the only Federal Bars which require an exam. 

RANT ALERT: The Northern District does not require anything more then showing up.  I think this is because the Northern District is located in Cleveland.  Nothing good ever happens in Cleveland.  Or Akron.  Or Youngstown.  Or Toledo.  Seriously.  Michigan and Ohio got into a WAR over Toledo.  Ohio lost.  Cleveland has a river that you can light on fire.  Last time I checked, the only other place with one of those was hell.  Akron has tires, yay tires.  I have nothing bad to say concerning the fine people of Youngstown, it is a great place, filled with many fine people of wonderfully non-stereotypical Italian descent.  There is nothing in Youngstown which might require a federal investigation.

The Southern District on the other hand, holds Columbus, Cincinnati, and Dayton.  Also, those other cities near West Virginia.  Dayton has the Air force Museum, and was the home of the Wright Brothers.(Slogan: Dayton, where flight was considered!) Cincinnati has runny slop it calls chili and a sub-par baseball team (the oldest sub-par baseball team in America!), and Columbus has the Santa Maria (We burned the Nina and the Pinta after one particularly glorious football game).  All of these are cool things (except the chili).  Obviously, we are more discriminating in the Southern District.

Anyway.  The exam was held in the same cavernous room as the real state bar, but consisted of 50 True-False questions, and lasted an hour.  Or in my case, 20 minutes.  I wasn't even the first person to finish.  All in all, I have no idea how I did.  The questions ranged from "You should wear a tie to court- True or False" to "Rule 27(p) of the Local Rules state that all forms filed on paper shall be on bright pink paper."  Now, I know there is a bright pink paper rule.  But is it a "shall" rule, or a "may" rule (and if that distinction makes sense to you- you might be an attorney).  Is it Rule 27(p) or is it  rule 29(q)?  See, it can get complicated really quick. (There is no bright pink paper rule.  I was trying to be funny.) 

I picked true.  If I knew that there was a rule that said something like that, I picked true.   We'll see how that turns out for me.

Oh, just when I think I am running on empty- I remember again how exciting it is to be doing what I am doing.
It turns out that the two veteran attorney's who have taken me in, R and M (anonymity for legal reasons), are the City Law Directors (I.E. village prosecutors) for West Jeff.  Well, that means they have more criminal cases.  So I spent yesterday morning in court defending an alleged drunk driver, then the afternoon doing gun law research to send some people to jail.  It is exposure to both sides of the law that is going to help the most.  I have a divorce scheduled for Tuesday, and a civil matter which was continued until next month.  EXPERIENCE!

I just spent the last few hours though, reading a bovine autopsy report. 

Now.  I have the medical training of your average cub scout.  Even though I was a boy scout, I never got those merit badges.  LIFE SAVING? No, I'm going to go get my Rifle shooting badge.  First Aid? No, I want my "landing on the moon" badge.  Anyway, I am reading this report.  I understood maybe.....three words?  Bovine?  check.  Autopsy? got it.  Report? understood.  Pulmonary parenchyma? RIIIIIIGHT!  I got excited because I knew the word "fecal."  I am going to need someone to break this down Barney style for me.

Now though, I must be off.  Going to spent my afternoon in the magical land called the County Recorder's Office.  Tip toeing through the index files, fingering through legal descriptions.  I am on a search for a mortgage and title.  Lucky me.

Well, I made the county newspaper this morning.  Not just in the paper either, the main headline.  To be fair, my CLIENT made the paper, due to the notorious nature of his crime, and the insanity plea we filed.  Sure enough though, they mentioned me, and even had a photo of my client and I in court.  Not bad for my second case.

I don't know what to do with the article though.  Do I start a scrapbook?

Sorry for the length of time between posts.  Things have been hectic the last week.  On Tuesday, I moved in to an office!  I now have a physical location.  Without getting into the nitty-gritty details, I have become an "associate" at a small firm.  The veteran attorney who I was paired up with on some court appointed work has invited me to use some of his office space.  I will pay a small rent, taken as a percentage of what I earn, in exchange I get an office, free access to Westlaw, all the office supplies I can use, etc.  I get to use the office, have a built in mentor, and he will throw me some business.  In exchange, I get to show him how to use some computer software. 
Other than that, I have drummed up some paying business (not just court appointment stuff), involving a waitress and some undercover minors.  Things are looking up for now, which is good.  I just need to keep plodding along.

I lost my first hearing today.  It was a Motion to Suppress, based on a bad Terry Stop, and an invalid waiver of Miranda rights.  I knew I was going to lose.  I didn't however, expect to be so nervous for it.  Man. I was sweating while I crossed the officer on the stand.  the judge also asked some questions of the witness, I think in an attempt to help me out.  All in all, though, I don't think I did too bad, for my first time.  All I can hope is that is gets easier from here.

Also, the lawyer who I have been sitting second chair with has started to talk about bringing me on with his office.  So, obviously, I'm not doing too bad a job.  We should hash out the details by next week.  It sounds like he wants to cut back his hours before he retires, and is looking for someone to help his partner pick up the slack.  The partner seems keen on the idea too.  I am hopeful that I can keep doing my own stuff on the side too. This could give me some much desired office space and income.  WHOOPEE!