Tulsa's Alternative Courts: Tulsa Drug Court, Tulsa DUI Court, Tulsa Mental Health Court, Tulsa Community Sentencing Court, Tulsa AAP Court

About Tulsa Drug Court, Tulsa DUI Court, Tulsa Mental Health Court, Tulsa Community Sentencing Court, Tulsa Accelerated Accountability Procedure (AAP) Court by Glen R. Graham, Web Page http://www.glenrgraham.com
Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney, Director Best Lawyers of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma
Phone: (918) 583-4621 or email glengraham@icu.net

Application to Tulsa Drug Court and Tulsa Mental Health Court posted at http://www.glenrgraham.com/id63.html

Over the years, the court system in Tulsa County has evolved and adapted to changing times and circumstances. Historically, Oklahoma has had a high rate of incarceration. In 2006, Oklahoma lead the nation in the rate of incarceration for female offenders. In response to public and political pressure and budgetary issues, the Oklahoma court system has evolved and developed alternative sentencing procedures and alternative courts to handle alternatives to incarceration.

The costs of incarceration versus the costs of alternatives to incarceration are significant enough to cause people to consider alternatives to building expensive prisons. Some people began searching for alternatives to incarceration even though the prison industrial complex offers financial incentives for private prisons and financial incentives for certain depressed areas.

As technology continues to advance, other alternatives to incarceration have begun to appear and to be in use in some of the alternative court programs in Tulsa County. The DUI-Drug court routinely requires either a scram (which is worn like an ankle bracelet and continuously measures perspiration for alcohol) or a telephone sobrietor monitoring system (which is attached to the telephone and when the person breathes into the machine it sends a signal as to the results). Also, there is often a requirement that an inter-lock alcohol breath testing device be installed in any vehicle in which the participant may operate. A global position monitoring system (GPS) is also available in appropriate cases. The technological progress and advancements are continuing to provide a multitude of less expensive means of supervising people without expensive prison costs.

It is only a matter of time until someone develops mobile electronic drug testing devices. See research at http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/journal/ They could would work on the same or similar principles to the scram or telephone sobrietor and car interlock testing devices.

The Tulsa DUI court and the Tulsa Drug court, basically run along the same basic model. It is limited to felony offenses, and normally repeat offenders or offenders that may be looking at possible incarceration and the alternative court is an alternative to incarceration. It is a “treatment” approach whereby the offender if they qualify and if the prosecutor agrees, can obtain treatment under strict guidelines and close court supervision. It is a four or five stage process. Initially, the offender is required to attend 3-4 AA or NA meetings per week, random UA’s, a counseling session, and make one court appearance per week for review before the Judge. After several weeks the offender will progress to the next stage and so on. Upon completion of the program at the end of about 18 months, then the offender is placed on probation and will see a probation officer for a period of time. It is not unusual for an offender to relapse and to require inpatient treatment several times. The Drug court and DUI court is a treatment oriented program and relapse and treatment are typical. After about 18 months, if the offender is unable to complete the program, there may be a motion to terminate filed by the prosecutor seeking to incarcerate the offender for failing to comply. A hearing may be held where the court will take testimony and make a decision about whether to terminate, incarcerate, or pass sentencing one more time for the offender to complete the program. At some point, which is usually after about 18-36 months, the offender will run out of time to complete the program.

The Tulsa County mental health court for criminal offenses is a new program and one of the first in the nation and the funding is severely limited at this time, so that means there may be a limited number of openings and that some people may be turned down. There may be some people that are on the borderline or that are marginally qualified but they may be turned down because of a limited number of openings and severe funding limitations.

The Tulsa County mental health court for criminal offenses is for non-violent offenders who suffer from some kind of severe mental illness. It is modeled along the same lines as the drug-dui court. The offender must have a non-violent offense and a non-violent background to qualify. The District Attorney makes the initial determination if the offender will be considered acceptable for the “mental health court.” The offender will be subject to an initial mental health assessment by the court approved assessor. If the offender does not qualify, the court may reject the offender. If the offender qualifies, then the offender has a treatment provider and a counselor and is required to make regular court appearances.

The Tulsa Community Sentencing Court which is also called the Tulsa Accelerated Accountability Procedure Court (AAP) offers an alternative for non-violent offenders to expedite their case through the court system. The offender is typically a non-violent offender and the prosecutor will review the case to see if the offender qualifies for admission into the AAP court.

The offender will be required to complete a Level of Services Inventory (LSI) which is an assessment to determine what the needs of the offender are and what level of services may be required. If the offender qualifies in the moderate range which is a point system, then the offender may qualify to be approved for a community sentence. A community sentence is probation with a community sentencing officer as the probation officer. The community sentencing officer is supposed to help the offender find the services in the community and to supervise the offender. If the offender relapses or violates the community sentencing rules, the offender may be “sanctioned” by requiring treatment or about 10 days in jail. If the offender continues to violate the rules or has a serious rule violation such as a new offense, then the offender faces the possibility of the revocation of the probation and the possibility of being sentenced to prison. A community sentence is better than regular probation in that like it sounds is an alternative to prison and attempts to find services in the community to meet the needs of the offender instead of prison.

If the offender scores in the high point range on the Level of Service Inventory (LSI) then the offender may be placed on probation through the Department of Corrections but the offender will not be on a community sentence. The supervision by the Department of Corrections is more law enforcement oriented and less community sentencing oriented. Some would analogize it to being on probation with a law enforcement supervisor instead of a community sentencing –social-psychologist –type supervisor. A community sentence probation can be better for the offender and for society in the long run because of the attempts to achieve real change and the attempts to find help for the offender in the community. Unfortunately, for some reason, some offenders fail to take advantage of all of the services and all of the help that is offered by a community sentence. In theory, if the offender qualifies, some of the services may be subsidized and the offender would not have to pay for everything themselves (in theory).

By Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer, my email glengraham@icu.net Web Page http://www.glenrgraham.com

Prior Juvenile Convictions Without a Jury Trial Questioned

The "injustice anywhere" blogger has returned to blogging from the Washington public defenders office and she presents some interesting arguments from a trial lawyer's perceptive, ground level, of practical experiences in the court system. Interesting blog about the importance of a jury trial which can result in a not guilty verdict. She questions some juvenile convictions where the juvenile did not have a right to a jury trial and where some prosecutors and courts may attempt to use the prior conviction against them even though they did not have an effective right to a jury trial in the case. Good point. See: Injustice Anywhere . . .: Why Just Having the Right to a Jury Trial Matters

I agree with her argument.

Practical Advice for Anyone Accused of a Crime

Practical Advice for Anyone Accused of a Crime
By Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney
(918) 583-4621 http://www.glenrgraham.com

Some people would assume that everyone knows these things and that they are common sense. But, when a person is under stress and not thinking too clearly, they might not do the things that they should to protect their rights to a fair trial.

The first thing anyone accused of a crime should do is consult with a knowledgeable attorney.

I would tell you to keep your mouth shut and not to discuss your case with anyone because they can become a witness against you --- even involuntarily --- if the prosecutor subpoena’s them to testify. Do not bring your family into my office to discuss the facts of your case in their presence because they may become subject to an involuntary subpoena by the prosecutor at a later time.

Do not voluntarily give any statements to any police officers, law enforcement officers, government agents, neighbors, jail house inmates, guards, or anyone else. Your lawyer is the only person you should talk to about your case. Be extremely careful.

I would tell you that all telephone calls from the jail are recorded and that all letters and correspondence in and out of the jail is xeroxed and copies made and saved for use against the defendant at trial.

I would tell you that if you are charged with an Oklahoma DUI or APC or drunk driving offense that you have only 15 days from the date of your arrest to request a hearing to attempt to save your driver’s license and that this is also a way for a lawyer to hear the testimony of the witness, by requesting a timely administrative hearing within 15 days of the date of arrest.

I would advise you that if there are any video tapes of the incident that you only have a limited amount of time to request a copy of the same if they are at a private business and that these tapes are not normally saved forever. The same is true of cell phone records, there may be time limits involved, and so do it immediately.

I would advise you that you could consider having an independent blood, hair, urine test performed for drugs. Some tests (hair) are considered accurate for up to 90 days or longer and some are accurate for very, very short periods of time - like urine tests.

I would advise you that witnesses have a way of disappearing, especially if they are defense witnesses. For some reason, defense witnesses tend to decide not to testify or to change their testimony.
The best thing to do is to consider having the witness write out a brief statement of what they saw and have them sign it to commit them to one story.

Sometimes, it is a good idea to have your lawyer hire a private investigator. However, each case is different and this may not be necessary. Some private investigators are former police officers and some may feel pressure to do their jobs in an efficient manner consistent with justice. Each case is different and hiring a private investigator is something that should be carefully considered. There is a stronger argument for work-product privilege if the attorney hires the investigator instead of the defendant. To be safe, it is always best to have the attorney hire any private investigator to be sure that all work is privileged.

Do not dress like a “person who committed the crime” when you appear in court. If you are accused of drug dealing, do not dress like a drug dealer. If you are accused of any other type of crime, do not dress like a person who would commit that type of crime.

In the really big cases, assume that your telephone calls are being recorded. Police have been known to obtain a court order allowing them to place a bug in the home, business, or on the telephone. Cell phone records can be obtained which will show what phone numbers were called and the location of the nearest cell phone tower. Some police have been known to place a global position system (GPS) monitor on to the motor vehicle of the defendant and then to track their movements with a lap top computer. Some mount with a magnet. They are sold online.

Your computer and your email--- are records --- and may tell on you. Do not write anything that can be used against you. Do not use search engines for terms that could be interpreted as implicating you in a crime.

Assume the worst, and prepare for the best. Gather the names and addresses of any witnesses. Talk to an experienced criminal defense lawyer about what actions to take to protect your rights to a fair trial.

Fair trials do not magically just happen. You will have to work to obtain a fair trial. We have an adversary system. It is the state or government versus fellow human being - you. You should hire the best, most experienced, criminal defense lawyer in your area to protect your right to a fair trial. Consider hiring your own private lie detector expert to administer a private lie detector test. Although they are not admissible in evidence, you might consider using it, if you pass, to push the prosecutor to drop charges in a weak case. Never agree to a lie detector administered at the request of the state without prior agreement of your lawyer. You should want your lawyer present for any test. Some lie detector tests are used to obtain confessions or to discredit your story. Example: Have you ever lied about anything? Have you ever taken anything without permission? So, you are a liar and and thief, right? "No" - you say. You might be human, but that is not what they asked you.

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney, Tulsa, Oklahoma
(918) 583-4621 Email: glengraham@icu.net

My Favorite Law Blogs

My Favorite Law Blogs - Top Lawyers in America and Others
By Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Attorney, Tulsa, Oklahoma
Email me: glengraham@icu.net

The law related blogs which I read the most and I like to post responses to their blogs are listed here:

The Top Trial Warriors and Top Civil Lawyers, Trial Consultants, Lawyers and Non-Lawyers, and the Best Criminal Defense Lawyers in America:

Blog of Gerry Spence - Top American Trial Lawyer

Jon Katz - Maryland Criminal Defense Attorney

Jon Katz - Virginia Criminal Defense Attorney

Mark Bennett - Houston Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

Scott Greenfield - New York Criminal Defense Attorney

Kevin Mahoney - Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney

David Tarrell - Omaha Nebraska - In the Moment

John Bryan - West Virginia Criminal Defense Blog

Gideon - Public Defender Blog

Brian Tannebaum - Miami Florida Criminal Defense Blog,

Randy England - Missouri Criminal Defense Blog

Professor Volokh (Calif.) Legal Blog

Texas Grit's for Breakfast Blog

Professor Simon's (Calif) Governing through Crime Blog

Professor Berman's Blog (Ohio) - Sentencing Law and Policy

Ann Reed - Jury Deliberations Blog

Jamie Spencer's Austin Criminal Defense Blog

SCOTUS Blog

Personal Blog by Terry Hull

Shawn Matlock - Dallas Texas Criminal Defense Attorney Blog

Stephen C. Smith – Maine Criminal Defense Attorney – Sex Offender Blog

and if Clarence Darrow had had a blog I would be reading it.

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Attorney, Tulsa, Oklahoma
My web profile: http://www.glenrgraham.com

Left anyone out: Post your suggestions.

Jury Voir Dire Question About Medications

In a recent story in the news, from the National Law Journal, story about jurors taking medications, is about some jury consultants and lawyers now asking some general medical questions to potential jurors:

“Please raise your hand when you answer the following question, and we will ask the court to allow you to discuss this matter privately in a side bar ---- Is there anyone on this jury who is taking any medications which might affect their jury service, please raise your hand?

It has been argued that this could be controversial due to the privacy provisions of various federal laws dealing with confidential health matters. The Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act limits questions about private health matters and there are legitimate concerns about maintaining individual rights to privacy. Seldom do lawyers object on behalf of juror’s rights to privacy and usually the issue is over-looked.

The National Law Journal articles speculates that over 50 per cent of the potential jurors are prescribed some kind of medication and that the many people over 40 years of age are on some kind of medication.

The article says that at a recent Florida Bar annual conference, at a session entitled "Juiced Jurors," SunWolf, an associate professor at Santa Clara University, passed around full-page drug ads torn from magazines listing a myriad of side effects for such drugs as Viagra, Claritin and Valium. The side effects can interfere with a jurors' ability to sit and concentrate during long trials, it quotes SunWolf. She urged lawyers to use the information to bounce jurors.

Some jury consultants consider it controversial to ask about medications because it could result in the elimination of too many potential jurors and can result in some jurors withholding information and other jurors using it as an excuse not to serve.

Some lawyers consider using the medication question targeted at jurors they don’t want to serve as jurors.

Ann Reed, trial lawyer who writes a blog, Jury Deliberations Blog, shies away from asking jurors about medications because too many jurors would be excused or use it as an excuse not to serve.

In various appeals around the country, the issue of juror use of medications continues to be raised as an error, but it is usually unsuccessful. In a 2007 Cleveland murder case, a juror was excused after it came to light that he was not taking his medication for mental illness and he fell asleep. See: Ohio v. Lorenzo Collins, No. CR-06-482881-A (Cuyahoga Co. Ct. of Common Pleas 2007).

In a Georgia murder case, the defendant argued on appeal that the verdict should be overturned partially because one of the jurors was asleep during the trial. The trial court declined to excuse the juror or ask what medication was taking. The Georgia Supreme Court upheld the conviction in Smith v. State, No. SO8A0018 (Sup. Ct. Ga.).

In a 2003 Michigan case, a defendant’s conviction for possession of marijuana was upheld despite a complaint that a juror failed to disclose that she need anxiety medication and a police officer was sent to retrieve it during the trial. The failure of defense lawyers to request a mistrial was held to have waived the error, if any. See, Michigan v. Bradley Scott Lasco, No. 239278 (Mich. Ct. of Appeals).

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer, Tulsa, Oklahoma
My Profile: http://www.glenrgraham.com

Police Lying or Testilying and Institutional Complacency

Police Lying or Testilying and Complacency

by Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney, http://www.tulsacriminaldefenses.com or email: glengraham@icu.net

Mark Bennett, Houston Texas Criminal Defense Lawyer, in his blog on testilying describes the "everyday incidents" of police officers lying in court. The same has been recognized for years by many criminal defense lawyers in America. Defense lawyers from Irving Younger to Alan Dershowitz to even on occasion a judge or police officer have openly admitted that from time to time, police officers lie in court.

Irving Younger has said: "Every lawyer who practices in the criminal courts knows that police perjury is commonplace.;” "[T]he policeman is as likely to be indicted for perjury by his co‑worker, the prosecutor, as he is to be struck down by thunderbolts from an avenging heaven." Irving Younger, The Perjury Routine, The Nation, May 8, 1967, at 596‑97.

See Alan M. Dershowitz, Controlling the Cops; Accomplices to Perjury, N.Y. Times, May 2, 1994, at A17 ("I have seen trial judges pretend to believe officers whose testimony is contradicted by common sense, documentary evidence and even unambiguous tape recordings.... Some judges refuse to close their eyes to perjury, but they are the rare exception to the rule of blindness, deafness and muteness that guides the vast majority of judges and prosecutors.");

See, Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the Anti‑ Corruption Procedures of the Police Dep't, City of New York, Commission Report 36 (1994) (Milton Mollen, Chair) [hereinafter Mollen Report] wherein it stated: "Several officers also told us that the practice of police falsification in connection with such arrests is so common in certain precincts that it has spawned its own word: 'testilying."

Why are prosecutors and some judges willing to ignore police officers lying? Professor Jay Silver says: "The institutional tendency to tolerate police perjury likely stems from the prosecutor's interest in maintaining smooth working relations with police, who gather the government's evidence and are often its most important witnesses at trial, and from the prosecutor's own competitive drive to win and to advance professionally." Jay S. Silver, Truth, Justice, and the American Way: The Case Against the Client Perjury Rules, 47 Vand. L. Rev. 339, 358 n.75 (1994).

As stated by Professor Slobogin, herein below in the his law review, paraphrasizing:
----police lying intended to convict someone, whether thought to be guilty or innocent, is wrong because it diminishes ‑‑ trust in government. Police perjury damages the credibility of police testimony. The loss of police credibility on the stand diminishes law enforcement's effectiveness in the streets. To the extent other actors, such as prosecutors and judges, are perceived to be ignoring or condoning police perjury, the loss of public trust may extend beyond law enforcement to the criminal justice system generally. See, below, professor Slobogin's law review.

So, what can the criminal defense lawyer do ? Some have suggested web sites in which the citizen can post complaints about police officers. Others have suggested, video taping the officers and weeding out the bad officers. Some suggest polygraph tests of the police officer and the citizen. Polygraphs may not be admitted in a criminal case but they might be considered in a labor dispute, internal affairs matter, and in some disciplinary proceedings. Some people may consider the results of the polygraph even if they are not admissible in the criminal case in chief.

Others have suggested having the officer present the so-called "anonymous" informant to the judge, especially, upon request of the judge, when the officer seeks search warrants. A judge should have the authority to require the disclosure of information concerning bogus anonymous informants and to require their appearance before the judge in chambers before the issuance of search warrants.

It has also been proposed that an independent lay witness should be allowed to accompany the police officers during the service of a search warrant. In India this is called the panch system.

What kinds of cross examination questions can the defense lawyer attempt to ask the police officer:

Officer what is “testilying”?

Officer, do you know the name of any officers in your department who have received any discipline for testilying?

Officer do you know of any officer in your department who has ever being prosecuted, fired, or convicted for testilying?

Officer would you be willing to submit to a lie detector test administered by an independent lie detector administrator?

Officer what is the “code of silence” between fellow police officers?

Officer, do you agree that a police officer being indicted for perjury by his co worker, the prosecutor, is about as likely as being struck down by thunderbolts?

Officer, do you know the name of any police officer in your department who has ever received a promotion or positive reward for breaking the "code of silence" against fellow police officers?

Some of the following ideas are from "Reform the Police" by Christopher Slobogin, University of Colorado Law Review (Fall 1996), cite as: 67 U.Colo.L.Rev. 1037 (1996).

Lying to convict the innocent is undoubtedly rejected by most police, as well as by others, as immoral and unjustifiable. In contrast, lying intended to convict the guilty‑‑in particular, lying to evade the consequences of the exclusionary rule ‑‑ is so common and so accepted in some jurisdictions that the police themselves have come up with a name for it: "testilying." See, Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the Anti‑ Corruption Procedures of the Police Dep't, City of New York, Commission Report 36 (1994) (Milton Mollen, Chair) [hereinafter Mollen Report] ("Several officers also told us that the practice of police falsification in connection with such arrests is so common in certain precincts that it has spawned its own word: 'testilying."').

Police perjury sometimes occurs in connection with the police reports. Although not technically testimony, police know these reports may be dispositive in a case resolved through plea bargaining, and can be compared to testimony in cases that aren't. As a result, "reportilying" also appears to be pervasive in some jurisdictions. The Mollen Commission, for instance, described how narcotics police "falsify arrest papers to make it appear as if an arrest that actually occurred inside a building [in violation of departmental regulations] took place on the street." Professor Stanley Fisher has also documented prolific use of the "double filing" system, in which the official police file forwarded to the prosecution and provided to the defense is cleansed of exculpatory facts or possible impeachment evidence.

Prosecutors put up with perjury because they need a good working relationship with the police to make their cases.

Additionally, at bottom, some prosecutors probably agree with the police that the end justifies the means. To the extent judges ignore obvious perjury, it is probably for the same reasons attributable to the prosecutor: sympathy for the police officer's ultimate goal and, as Professor Morgan Cloud put it, "tact"‑‑the fact that "[j]udges simply do not like to call other government officials liars‑‑especially those who appear regularly in court." Morgan Cloud, The Dirty Little Secret, 43 Emory L.J. 1311, 1323‑24 (1994).

Officers should be commended and promoted for their efforts to prevent testilying. The rewards would have to be significant to break the code of silence followed by the police. The challenge is there to try to correct this problem.
What will you do?

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,
Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Different Kinds of Lawyers: Trial Lawyer vs. the Poser Who Seldom Goes to Trial

Different Kinds of Lawyers: Trial Lawyer (Warrior)
and the "Poser" Who Seldom Goes to Trial by Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer (918) 583-4621
Email: glengraham@icu.net

What is the difference between a lawyer who goes to trial on cases and a lawyer who pleads everyone out based on a plea bargain without a trial?

Over the 21 years that I have been practicing law, I have observed different kinds of criminal lawyers, some are the "real deal" - a genuine criminal trial lawyer --- warrior --- capable of going to trial on a case and winning it. Some are lawyers who seldom go to trial on the case. Some are just businessmen --- out to make a fast buck by pleading the defendant "guilty" and almost never going to trial on the case.

There are some lawyers who just withdraw from the case when they find out the client will not accept some kind of plea bargain in the case. Then the client is forced to scramble at the last minute to look for the "real" deal --- a genuine trial lawyer.

Why did the "poser" lawyer who seldom goes to trial on the case even accept the client's money to begin with if they never intend to fight the case?

Sometimes, it boils down to the plea bargain lawyer's idea deep within his heart --- something like he thinks everyone is guilty and should plea bargain, and he does not respect the jury system.

Why do some lawyers fail to advise the client from the very beginning of the case --- hey --- this is a case that may go to trial and you will have to borrow the money to pay a lawyer sufficient money to go to trial on the case or the lawyer will withdraw?

What is the lawyer afraid of? Are there some lawyers that just don't know how to do an effective job at a jury trial? Are there some lawyers who never go to trial on a case?

A defendant has an absolute right to a jury trial. A defendant should have an absolute right to competent --- effective assistance of counsel.

Ultimately, it is a buyer beware world. You might want to check your lawyer out before you hire him. Ask him how he feels about doing a jury trial in your case and look him in the eye and shake his hand. You can learn a lot by asking a few more questions of the lawyer.

Master Trial Lawyer - Warrior, Gerry Spence, Invites You To Visit His Blog

Master trial lawyer - warrior, Gerry Spence, has started his blog, began July 15, 2008, and has invited everyone to visit his blog:

http://gerryspence.wordpress.com/

"The trial of a case, in its simplest form, is telling a story jurors can understand. Yet most lawyers are taught little, if anything, about communicating with others."

"I have told my students at Trial Lawyers College—where we teach practicing people's lawyers how to be real, how to win by caring, how to be honest in the presentation of themselves—that if they take care of their clients, no matter how meager the compensation, that the money aspect of the practice will eventually take care of itself. That is a promise."

“I instruct the lawyers, we call them warriors, for these warriors fight for the rights of people against the daunting power of corporations and government…”

Spence wrote: "I think of William Lloyd Garrison, the Abolitionist leader on Slavery in America who in 1831 wrote:

“I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject I do not wish to think or speak or write with moderation.

“No! No! Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm. Tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of a ravisher. Tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen, but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest—I will not equivocate—I will not excuse. I will not retreat a single inch—and I will be heard.”

And so, dear friends and readers, Mr. Gerry Spence, master trial lawyer and warrior, has started his blog and he will be heard !

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney, Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.tulsacriminaldefenses.com

Attorney-Client Privilege and Limitations

Dangerous Holes in the Attorney-Client Privilege
by Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Attorney. Web: http://www.tulsacriminaldefenses.com/

Most people are aware of the attorney client privilege, sort of like the sacred confidential communications to your doctor or your minister, priest, or rabbi. Fewer people are aware of the ease with which the attorney-client privilege can be breached and the holes are so deep and dangerous that once you fall into the loop-hole you might not survive.

Ring ...... or musical tone ....... off goes the phone !!! Who can it be? Well, if it's a collect call from the jail or from a prison, the phone call is being recorded ! Yes, there is a message stating --- "this phone call may be recorded . . . . " --- but most people incorrectly assume that the call is not really being recorded. But, wait. Yes, it is being recorded and saved for up to three (3) years for use against the defendant. Even if the phone call is to relay information to the defendant's lawyer, the phone call is being recorded. The phone call to the lawyer's office is also recorded and the information discussed no longer "confidential" when law enforcement can listen to the conversation and has access to the conversation.

All letters in and out of the jail or prison are xeroxed and saved in a file folder with the defendant's name.

Breach of the Client Interview: If the defendant is out of custody and brings his wife or a friend or family member to the lawyer's office and they are present while the "confidential" communications take place then they become subject to possible subpoena.

So, if you would lie to God, why should we believe you now?

Sample Cross Examination Technique
by Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, Tulsa, Oklahoma
http://www.glenrgraham.com

I found an interesting brochure that gave a sample cross examination to prepare a witness for ligation (possibly a deposition or lie detector or the like) which said something like this:

(I have rewritten it and changed the characters to make it more interesting)~~~

Defense attorney/police officer/lie detector administrator: Mr. X have you in the last ten years been put in a position where you told someone a lie even a white lie, such as saying someone looks good even though they did not or that the meal they prepared was good even though it was not or said something that was not true?

Witness: Yes

Defense attorney/police officer/lie detector adminstrator: Mr. X in the last ten years, have you even once taken anything even a paper-clip or maybe borrowed a pen without returning it or maybe some other thing that you "borrowed" and you kept without returning it?

Witness: Yes

Defense attorney/police officer/lie detector administrator: So, Mr. X, by your own admission when you do these things what does it make you?

If they were being helpful --- they might say: Mr. X, would you agree that just because you made an isolated mistake it doesn't make you a liar and a thief but instead it makes you HUMAN !!!

Witness: Yes.

Of course, I am adding and changing the dialog and re-writing it. But, this idea kind of is like what some lie detector administrators do when they want to trip the guy up...... so you have stolen before and so you have lied before..... and you cheated on your wife --- you took an oath to God not to do that ..... so if you would lie to God ...... why should I believe you now ..... etc.

3rd degree .... to the 10th power.

One of many reasons not to take a lie detector test or to agree to be cross-examined by police officers.

Without knowing what kind of questions are going to be asked you have no control over the out-come of either a lie detector test or cross examination.

Police officers may even attempt to withhold the suspect's sleep or water -food or cigarettes to attempt to obtain an advantage while cross-examining the suspect and attempting to obtain a "confession" even if it is a false confession.

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Attorney for the Accused, Tulsa, Oklahoma http://www.tulsacriminaldefenses.com

Tulsa Bail Bonds Reductions and How to Get the Bond Lowered

Tulsa Bail Bonds Reductions and How to Get the Bond Lowered by Tulsa Criminal Attorney, Glen R. Graham (Over 21 Years Experience) Tel. 918.583.4621

The best strategy to obtain a Tulsa bail bond reduction is to hire a Tulsa Lawyer or Attorney first such as Glen R. Graham , Attorney at Law, and when you hire me to obtain a bail bond reduction, I will file a motion and the same will be set for a hearing at least by one -two working days (not including weekends). The court will schedule a hearing and we can present argument and documents and call witnesses and present our arguments to the court as to why the bond should be reduced. If the court grants a bond redution, I can refer you to several good local bondsman such as to A Bargain Bail Bonds of Tulsa at 918-583-6600 or others.

On a case by case basis, it may be possible to get the Judge to consider releasing the defendant on a pre-trial court services release either with or without an ankle monitor depending upon all of the circumstances of the case. Certain offenses such as violent felonies and certain other types of felony offenses may not qualify for consideration. But, in the right case, the court may allow the defendant's release on pre-trial release without having to pay funds to a bondsman. By filing a motion for bond reduction or release on pretrial court services release, the matter can be brought to the court's attention for consideraiton.

In considering a Tulsa bail bond reduction, the court will consider the purpose of bond which is to guarantee the appearance of the defendant at any future court dates and not to punish the defendant. Additionally, the court will consider the factors set forth in Oklahoma and Supreme Court decisions.

Unless the right to bail before trial is preserved, the presumption of innocence would lose its meaning. See Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 4, 72 S.Ct. 1, 3, 96 L.Ed. 3 (1951). The online Justice Denied Magazine has stories about when the presumption of innocence goes wrong and people are wrongfully convicted. Also, see the on-line blog of Justice Denied Blog. The sixth (6th) Amendment right to a speedy trial over-laps with the other rights in the Constitution and with the presumption of innocence. Prolonged pretrial incarceration before trial is tantamount to punishment before trial and violates the presumption of innocence. Check out the web site http://www.innocence.org and the numerous over-turned convictions --- some where people gave false confessions. Tulsa, Oklahoma is home to one of the largest jury verdicts for over-turned DNA --- convitions - false photo identification --- 14.5 million dollar jury verdict reduced to 12.25 million on appeal ---- Alvin McGee, Jr. v. City of Tulsa - Northern District of Oklahoma. Oklahoma was recently found to have the highest rate of incarceration for women in the nation according to the national bureau of crime statistics (2006).

The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that prolonged pretrial detention prior to an independent determination of probable cause may unjustly “imperil a suspect’s job, interrupt his source of income, and impair his family relationships.” See, Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S.Ct. 854, 43 L.Ed.2d 54 (1975).

The purpose of bail is to assure the appearance of the accused at such times as the court may direct, and that bond should never be used for the purpose of punishing the accused, but the sole guide in fixing the amount thereof should be to cause the accused appearance to answer the charge against him. See, Application of Owen, 349 P.2d 786 (Okl.Cr. 1960); Ex Parte Knight, 289 P.2d 156 (Okl.Cr. 1955), Gibson v. State, 655 P.2d 1028 (1982).

In Clark v Hall, 2002 OK 29 (2002), the court held that defendant’s have a due process right to an individualized determination of bail and that “bail in Oklahoma is not and cannot serve as a criminal punishment.” The right to the protection against the denial of bail and excessive bail has historical roots. The Magna Carta and the United States Constitution Bill of Rights and the Oklahoma Constitution contain provisions protecting an individual’s right to bail.

Presently, the judges of the State of Oklahoma are required to consider the guidelines set forth in 1979 in Petition of Humphrey, 1979 OK CR 97, 601 P.2d 103, when setting the amount of bail. These guidelines include:

1. The seriousness of the crime charged against the defendant, the apparent likelihood of conviction and the extent of the punishment prescribed by the Legislature;
2. The defendant's criminal record, if any, and previous record on bail if any;
3. His reputation, and mental condition;
4. The length of his residence in the community;
5. His family ties and relationships;
6. His employment status, record of employment and his financial condition;
7. The identity of responsible members of the community who would vouch for defendant's reliability;
8. Any other factors indicating defendant's mode of life, or ties to the community or bearing on the risk of failure to appear.

The Tulsa District Court has rules dealing with the handling or setting of bonds. Currently, there are some recommended bond amounts for different types of charges but under the current case law, a court is supposed to consider the individual factors of the case which can be reviewed when the defendant’s attorney files a motion for bond reduction.

An Oklahoma attorney general opinion has suggested that bail bond guidelines may even be unconstitutional because a court is required to consider the individual factors and circumstances of the case. See Oklahoma Criminal Defense Blog regarding attorney general opinion on bail bonds schedules. Furthermore, read the Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson Attorney General Opinion Here which states:
Attorney General Opinion 2000 OK AG 61 (Number 61 - Decided 12-11-2000):

Attorney General says predetermined bond schedules determined by Judges unconstitutional:

"17 By focusing on the crime committed as opposed to the circumstances of the individual arrestee, there is no guarantee that a defendant will return for hearing. In addition, failure to review the Humphrey factors may produce a bail amount that is excessive and, thus, unconstitutional.

¶18 As noted above, a court may not adopt rules that conflict with constitutional provisions. For the reasons statedabove, the use of a jail bail schedule infringes on defendants' constitutional rights guaranteed by both the Oklahomaand United States Constitutions."

"Accordingly, judges may not promulgate administrative rules that mandate the use of a bail schedule based on the crime of which a defendant is accused. It is, therefore, the official Opinion of the Attorney General that: A presiding judge has no authority to establish, by rule or otherwise, a bail schedule which contains predetermined bail amounts based on the crimes committed. "

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Tulsa Drug Lawyer - Tulsa Drug Attorney - Retaining the Best

Tulsa Drug Lawyer – Tulsa Drug Attorney - What to Look for Hiring an Attorney

Tulsa drug trafficking cases are some of the most complex and serious cases because they carry the possibility of up to a life prison sentence and after two previous drug convictions, a drug trafficking case carries a possible sentence of life without parole unless the attorney can sufficiently assert some legal defense or obtain a plea reduction or plea bargain reduction to a lesser offense. A possession of controlled drug with intent to distribute is equally serious. Even a Tulsa possession of a controlled drug case is a serious matter. A Tulsa Possession of Marijuana case may have defenses that some lawyers may not know about. The state has enormous resources to prosecute people for crimes. You need to be careful about hiring the attorney and you need the right attorney to represent you.

You need an experienced criminal defense attorney committed to quality and an experienced --- drug lawyer --- such as myself ---- Glen R. Graham --- with over 20 years of experience fighting for the rights of my clients --- I will make sure you are treated fairly and I have the experience to take your case to a jury trial and through to appeal if necessary. I have the proven ability to handle your case and I am committed to excellence through vigorous advocacy with proven success in the court room.

This information is from the law office of Glen R. Graham Attorney serving Tulsa, Oklahoma and surrounding areas. If you are in the area, and need an attorney you can visit our website by clicking here . Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, telephone: (918) 583-4621 or (918) 260-8184 - Tulsa, Oklahoma or my email: glengraham@icu.net

What To Look For In A Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney

Ask the attorney if they are a member of the any specific groups in Tulsa or Oklahoma that are dedicated to the defense of criminal defendants and what the name of the organizations are?

It is surprising how many attorneys are not members (I am a member of both) of the TWO MAIN CRIMINAL DEFENSE ORGANIZATIONS IN TULSA COUNTY:

(1) The Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
(2) The Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association

One is the local county criminal defense lawyers and the other is the main state criminal defense attorneys association.

Any Tulsa criminal defense attorney that is committed to quality criminal defense is a member of both organizations.

The Best Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney should also have a web site and have helpful legal blogs such as:

http://www.tulsacriminaldefense.blogspot.com/ and this blog, and web site: http://www.glenrgraham.com/

Ask him how long he has practiced law, and how often he goes to jury trial, and if he files many motions to suppress or if he has any objection to filing a special motion to suppress or quash the arrest in your case. The attorneys that are just in it for the money or for a volume of business may turn down your case because the recognize that you are expecting them to actually fight you case and they don’t want to spend that much time fighting the case. They merely want to plea you guilty without working the case.

Makes Promises Too Good To Be True

An attorney who promises results that sound just too good to be true is probably not being realistic. Some people call this “sales puffing.” Like the old used car dealer exaggerating the quality of a used car. It is a buyer beware world and no lawyer legally or ethically can promise results that are just too good to be true.

No attorney should promise a particular result in a criminal case. Attorneys can promise to do their best. Attorneys can believe in the quality of a case. Attorneys can believe they will probably be able to get a particular result. But a good Attorney should never guarantee a particular result.

A good attorney may give you a general analysis of possibilities in your case, and what may or may not happen, and how the system works, and what sometimes may happen but this is ABSOLUTELY NOT a guarantee of a particular result your case.

Not being willing to guarantee a result is not a sign of weakness, it is a sign of experience and wisdom. The problem is that the bottom line result is ultimately in the hands of other people NOT THE ATTORNEY.

A judge and/or a prosecutor and/or a jury must act in order to resolve any criminal case. It is impossible to guarantee the actions of other people. Judges, prosecutors, and/or juries have been known to make mistakes. Therefore, a competent attorney will never be able guarantee a particular result.

Use Common Sense

Do not accept at face value every statement made by the attorney. It could be merely exaggerated sales puffing or sales talk. Take statements with a grain of salt. Look at them with a critical eye. Does this sound realistic or more like sales puffing and exaggerations?

Beware of the Attorney with too much business or the attorney that focuses solely upon money.

Some attorneys just have too much business or focus too much on getting a volume of business instead of trying to do quality legal work for people. An attorney with too much business is not going to have time to sit and discuss your case in his office and just tries to meet you in the court house instead of scheduling a time to sit and discuss your case. It is not likely that he will file the appropriate motions and he rarely if ever goes to trial.

One of the best ways to catch an attorney who uses exaggerated sales talk is to ask them if they remember the last case they took to a jury trial and if it is listed on the web site for the court house or if they remember the name of the defendant? Most of the time, the attorney will avoid answering the question because they do not go to jury trial and they plead most of their clients out and they don’t really fight the case.

More General Information About Domestic Violence Cases

More General Information about Domestic Violence Cases
by Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law
See other post about subject matter herein below this post at:
More information about Tulsa Domestic Assault and Battery Criminal Offense

Victim's or Witness Request to Dismiss and Affidavit: (Google Docs)
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhmqv6sp_0c4pxcddz -

You can print this off and give it to your lawyer (not the prosecutor) to give to the prosecutor at the proper time. It is not binding on the government but it does give the assigned prosecutor something in his file from the accuser. If the prosecutor has it too soon, they may attempt to force the witness to testify involuntarily so you may want to discuss this with your lawyer before subjecting yourself to persecution by the prosecutor.

Domestic violence assault and battery cases are viewed as extremely serious cases where the violence may escalate or where people may be injured or children psychologically injured.

There is political pressure to pursue all domestic violence cases because there is a belief that the violence may escalate or that people's lives or safety may be endangered.

Alleged "victims" may want to legitimately dismiss the charges but the criminal case is being prosecuted by the State and not the victim. The prosecutor may initially refuse to dismiss the case in order to extract a "plea" from the defendant which will require counseling which is usually once per week for fifty-two (52) weeks under the current statutory laws passed by the Oklahoma legislature. This blanket law ignores the individual differences between individuals and between the individual circumstances of the specific case. Upon conviction, it requires 52 weeks of counseling simply because it is a domestic violence assault and battery case.

The case may get dismissed anyway if the state is unable to prove the case if there is no witness that testifies after the case is set for trial unless the state can prove the case with other evidence.

Without a witness, the state will attempt to use the following:

1. Admissions and confessions by the defendant;
2. Photographs of the injuries;
3. 911-tape of the call reporting the incident;
4. Statements that fall within the exception under the Crawford analysis. The Crawford case held that a defendant has a right to confrontation but not as to statements that were not "testimonial" in nature. So, 911-tapes are considered non-testimonial and are admissible as an exception to the Crawford rule;
5. Other witnesses.

Many times the other evidence is not sufficient and the case may get dismissed at the time of trial without sufficient evidence.

Most prosecutors will attempt to telephone the "victim" at the phone number in the police report. Some prosecutors may attempt to bluff the victim into changing their mind about pursuing the case. It is not right to lie or intimidate a witness. However, prosecutors generally do not get prosecuted by other prosecutors. So, I have heard of cases where a prosecutor would threaten to have the "victim" arrested if she did not appear in court. However, the statute dealing with material witness warrants states that a victim cannot be arrested on a material witness warrant. A smart victim would not talk to a prosecutor who might prosecute them for any statements which they might make indicating they were not truthful when they filed a police report or indicating that they have changed their mind about what happened. Some prosecutors will threaten to take the children away if the victim does not co-operate. A prosecutor cannot "take the children away" because the victim refuses to co-operate. A prosecutor can request a DHS investigation but this does not mean that the children are automatically taken away. Most DHS investigations are performed by an "independent" DHS case worker and their reports will be reviewed by an independent Judge. Unfair statements by prosecutors designed to intimidate or coerce victims into pursuing a case which should be dismissed are not ethical. Prosecutors generally will not prosecute other prosecutors.

Attorneys are supposed to be bound by a Code of Professional Responsibility which is supposed to apply to all attorneys even prosecutors.

What to Expect on a Tulsa DUI or APC

What to Expect on a Tulsa DUI, DWI, or APC By Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, (918) 583-4621, more information available at his web site, http://www.glenrgraham.com/ More information available at http://www.tulsacriminaldefense.blogspot.com/ Each case is different so there are some individual differences from case to case. You may have a defense to the case and you should schedule an appointment with an attorney to discuss your specific facts. My telephone number is (918) 583-4621 and I only handle Oklahoma cases. - You should be advised that you only have fifteen (15) days to request a hearing from the Department of Public Safety to attempt to save your driving privileges. You should hire a lawyer to file the proper request in the proper format to request a hearing to attempt to save your driving privileges. Your driving privileges are treated separately from your criminal case. Everyone is presumed to know the law, so if you fail to make a timely request for a hearing, you will have waived you right to a hearing on your drivers license. It may be possible to use the drivers license hearing as a “discovery tool” to see what the police officer will testify to in your case in the criminal case. Again, if you fail to make a timely request for a drivers license hearing then you will have waived your right to a hearing on your drivers license. - Usually, the court is going to require a “substance abuse assessment” before the case can be finalized or any deals can be worked out. Also, if you score sufficiently good on the assessment, you might be able to argue that you do not have a problem and use it to obtain a better deal or as a mitigating factor. Any DUI school can give you a substance abuse or alcohol assessment which costs $175.00 dollars. Most take payments but will not give the assessment until they have been paid. The court will order you to comply with any requirements stated in the assessment. If it is determined that you do not have a problem with substances or alcohol, then this information can also be conveyed to the court. Normally, the court will pass the case to give you time to complete the assessment and to pay your lawyer. - Most lawyers expect to be paid prior to completion of the case. At some point a plea bargain may be worked out. Normally, if this is your first offense and you do not have a "bad" criminal record and do not have other offenses and if the facts are right, then the court will put you on a 4 month program for you to complete certain requirements during those 4 months. The normal requirements are the DUI school, victim impact panel, (if under 25 yrs – then the Youthful Offender Program), and sometimes community service plus fines and costs. Each case is different and it depends upon the recommendations of the assessment and the court.

However, sometimes the prosecutor will agree to a straight deferred sentence, if it is your first offense and you do not have a prior criminal record. Each case is different and must be evaluated on it's individual merits. Was there an accident? Does the defendant have any prior criminal record? What was the breath result - high or low or refusal? What were all the circumstances involving the offense and what traffic laws were violated? Each case is different and you must talk to a lawyer in person to determine what might be an acceptable outcome on the case. Do NOT TAKE A CHANCE - when your freedom is involved - talk to a lawyer in person!!!

In some city municipal courts, the prosecutors are not willing to agree to deferred sentences but will agree to a program to reduce to a lesser charge such as impaired driving or reckless driving. Each case is different and it depends on which court the case is assigned to and who the prosecutor and Judge assigned to the case and what are the facts of the case and circumstances of the defendant. Each case is different, you should talk to a lawyer in person. You can call me at (918) 583-4621 - Glen R. Graham - Attorney at Law.

If you are under 25 yrs, then you may qualify for a YDD program which results in a “deferred sentence” which means upon successful completion of the court requirements (including probation) then your case is dismissed and expunged upon payment of the costs and assessments. If you are over 25 yrs, then you may qualify for an adult version of the program which results in either a deferred sentence or a reduced charge to a lesser offense and a fine and probation.

Again, each case is different and it depends upon the facts. A person who is charged with DUI and has young children in the car or speeds through a school zone or endangers other peoples lives such as having a bad accident while DUI, may have a more difficult time attempting to work out a satisfactory plea bargain. Each case is differenct and you need to consult with a local lawyer in your area. I only handle Oklahoma cases and I have been practicing law for over 20 years. Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings, Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, (918) 583-4621

Legal Information About Domestic Assault and Battery Criminal Misdemeanor

General Information About Domestic Assault & Battery Cases
From the Defense Point of View

By Glen R.Graham, Attorney at Law, over 20 years experience, more information available at his web site: http://www.glenrgraham.com/

Victim's or Witness Request to Dismiss and Affidavit: (Google Docs)

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dhmqv6sp_0c4pxcddz -

You can print this off and give it to your lawyer to give to the prosecutor at the proper time. It is not binding on the government but it does give the assigned prosecutor something to put in his file from the accuser. If the prosecutor has it too soon, they may attempt to force the witness to testify involuntarily (call you up and threaten you) so you may want to discuss this with your lawyer before subjecting yourself to persecution by the prosecutor. A lawyer would probably bring it to court and give it to the court on the day set for hearing or trial when the witness does not appear.

The evidence is what determines the out-come in most cases. It depends upon the facts and what facts can be legally admitted under the rules of evidence or presented to the judge or jury in open court. A defense lawyer is prohibited by law and ethics from making any statement to a witness which specifically tells the witness not to come to court to testify. A witness should use their independent judgment to decide what is in their best interest. A witness should hire a lawyer or at least talk to an “independent” lawyer (a lawyer not representing the defendant and a lawyer who is not the prosecutor) on the telephone about what is in their best interest. Neither the prosecutor nor the defense lawyer represent the victim.

Title 22 O.S. Section 720 specifically states that a “material witness warrant” cannot be issued for a VICTIM in a criminal misdemeanor case for failing to appear. A material witness warrant can be issued for a witness who is not a victim under certain circumstances like proof of service of a subpoena or in felony cases where a non-victim witness makes certain statements to police or prosecutor about not appearing. If a victim is personally served with a subpoena there is the possibility of the prosecutor asking the court to issue a warrant for the victim if they fail to appear but this is a matter of discretion and some prosecutors may let it go and some might not. If the victim is not personally served with a subpoena then how would the victim know to come to court and nothing usually happens. Some prosecutors may attempt to telephone the victim and talk them into coming to court or try to scare them into appearing in court or even say they will seek to have a warrant issued which is not possible against a victim unless there is personal service of the subpoena. Without personal service of a subpoena on the victim, there is not much the prosecutor can do in a misdemeanor case.

A defendant and a lawyer for the defendant should never tell any witness not to appear in court because someone could try to imply that they intimidated a witness or possibly obstructed justice or committed a crime of witness tampering.

A victim may be threatened with prosecution if they talk to the district attorney and make certain statements. The district attorney is a prosecutor who is sworn to uphold the law and does not represent the victim and is not the attorney for the victim. A victim has an absolute right to hire a lawyer to represent them.

It is a crime to file a false police report so if a victim tells a prosecutor that they lied when they told the police that something happened then the prosecutor has the discretion to file charges against the victim. It is perjury to testify under oath to something that is not true. So, if the victim filed a false police report and then testifies under oath in court to something that is not true then they can be charged with perjury. A prosecutor has discretion about whether to file charges and does not always file these charges. If the victim does not talk to the prosecutor then they cannot file a criminal offense against the victim for filing a false police report unless there is some other evidence to support the charge.

Many cases are set for a trial and then if the prosecutor is unable to obtain personal service of the subpoena on the victim or other witnesses or if there is not a confession from the defendant and if there is not a 911-tape recording from the victim, then in some cases the case may get dismissed.

The case can be prosecuted without a victim when there is other evidence such as 911-tape recording, pictures of victim showing injuries, confessions, OR other witnesses. There is political and social pressure to obtain a conviction. There is the possibility that the violence could escalate (possible murder or serious injuries unless counseling) and so there is a desire for the defendant to be ordered to go the counseling which can only be ordered by the court if there is a conviction.

A prosecutor may attempt to telephone the victim at the phone numbers listed for the victim in the police reports. A prosecutor may threaten to have the victim arrested (although under 22 O.S. § 720 states a victim cannot be arrested on a material witness warrant) or may threaten to send an investigator to the home of the victim to bring them to court. A prosecutor may make statements to the victim to get them to appear in court. There are some “stories” about some prosecutor calling a victim and stating that they would be arrested if they did not appear in court even though the laws says a victim cannot be arrested for a material witness warrant under 22 O.S. § 720. One story is that a prosecutor once told a victim that they would call DHS to pick up the children or file a report with DHS. (Anyone call call DHS but that does not automatically mean that DHS will take someone’s children. They will investigate the allegation and make an “independent determination.”) Most domestic cases don’t involve the children or any direct harm to the children but there are exceptions. Prosecutors don’t normally prosecute other prosecutors for statements made to victims. Defense lawyers can be bar complainted, tape recorded, and prosecuted for statements that they make to the victim. A defense lawyer may be threatened with prosecution for statements made to a victim so most defense lawyers prefer not to talk to the victim. A lawyer for a defendant should not specifically tell a victim not to appear in court. However, a victim can always contact any “independent” lawyer in the telephone book to ask about their rights and what is in their own best interest.

Neither the prosecutor nor the defense lawyer represent the victim. A victim has the right to hire their own lawyer to represent them or to at least talk to an “independent” lawyer (not the defense or prosecutor) on the telephone about it.

Increasing the Percentage of Cases that go to Trial to Achieve Justice

I think if we, as defense lawyers, could increase even slightly, the percentage of cases that go to trial, then it might be possible to achieve a better sense of "justice" for some of our clients. Obviously, the current system is designed for a "plea bargain" and not necessarily for "justice." However, prosecutors have an ethical duty to not prosecute a case in which they personally possess a reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused irregardless of pressure from their supervisors or the public.

From the ABA Standards on Criminal Justice:
Standard 3-3.8 Discretion as to Noncriminal Disposition

Illustrative of the factors which the prosecutor may properly consider in exercising his or her discretion are:

(i) the prosecutor’s reasonable doubt that the accused is in fact guilty;

(ii) the extent of the harm caused by the offense;

(iii) the disproportion of the authorized punishment in relation to the particular offense or the offender

(iv) possible improper motives of a complainant

(c) A prosecutor should not, be compelled by his or her supervisor to prosecute a case in which he or she has reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused.

An email received by my colleague, Brian Tannebaum, over at his blog - here - stated:

"This is all a result of a system that is designed for pleas, in which 2% of cases go to trial. Therefore, prosecutors are judged on conviction rates and pleas. They should be judged on whether they act honorably and thoughtfully on what they do and don't prosecute. It is further the result of this country's CYA mentality. No one wants to be on the O'Reilly factor.

Therefore, cops make arrests they don't really agree with and pass it up the chain, hoping the State will do the right thing.

The State files and pursues the case, while making a decent plea offer to the innocent Defendant, because they have to "back up the officer".

The judges deny motions to suppress and other defense applications, because there is never any political capital to be gained in siding with a Defendant.

The underfunded and overworked lawyer pleas the client out, or he just might lose to a jury of citizens who assume that a guy couldn't be arrested, filed on, and have a Judge allow a trial, if he is actually... innocent.

Its all capped off by a PCA from the District Court of Appeals, if they are too busy to write an opinion on that particular case.

I, for one, personally think that the only way to combat this trend is for more defendants, and their attorneys, to be willing to go trial. If we can raise the percentage of cases that go to trial then more nonsense gets exposed and the judges will encourage the State to not waste their time and clog their docket.... instead of leaning on us."

Subprime Loan Crisis Ramifications & Consequences

Professor Jonathan Simon, UC at Berkeley, on his blog, here, says that it was only a matter of time before the rippling "subprime" loan crises became a story of crime. He points out the preferred story by some media is the street crimes by some poor people and minorities instead of the "suite" crimes by the educated professionals and he cites a story by MSNBC in his blog.

This is an interesting story and I wonder what effect this may have in picking a jury. Will the potential juror's see the subprime loan scandal as the story of crimes by minorities and poor on foreclosed homes or as the story of swindles and con-games and fraud by educated professionals or as a little bit of both? Vacant, abandoned houses and decaying neighborhoods become labeled crime neighborhoods or high crime areas as the middle class move out and the unemployed and poor move in. Eventually, maybe, some neighborhoods turn around after some new investors buy the properties and rehabilitate them, sometimes. At other times, urban renewal goes through and demolishes the old neighborhood.

Interesting ideas. What other effects of the subprime loan crises can we expect? Loans may dry-up, investors flee, increased governmental over-sight, decline in new housing market, higher interest rates, etc. ? Or, maybe, fewer defaults, fewer bad loans, less foreclosures, less mortgage fraud? There is going to be a period of "adjustment" as the market adapts to the new environment. Things usually do get better.

Biblical Authority in Opposition to Snitching

I have previously written about the Biblical authority in opposition to the use of hearsay evidence and the right to confrontation and the right against self-incrimination --- see my post here: HERE

Scott Henson’s blog cited HERE discusses Biblical authority in opposition to “snitching” or his interpretation: and the comments following his post are excellant!!!

Mosaic Law required that "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Christ formally affirmed this doctrine as part of the New Testament covenant in Matthew 18: 15-16, as the Apostle Paul did in Second Corinthians.He also refers to the Synod of Elvira, an important provincial religious council in Spain that occurred sometime during the first decade of the Fourth Century, prior to Emperor Constantine's conversion and Christianity's formal, public acceptance in the Roman Empire. This was a period when Christians were harshly persecuted by the Romans, wherein he cited the Christian version of the modern "stop snitching" code (here's the only web version I can find: Scroll down to see #73):

http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon%20Law/ElviraCanons.html

"A Christian who denounces someone who is then ostracized or put to death may not commune even as death approaches. If the case was less severe, he or she may commune in less than five years. If the informer was a catechumen, he or she may be baptized after five years."

Refusing communion was the most terrible punishment early Christians could think of - far more awful, in the long run, than the death penalty for the unsaved soul.The reference to a Christian denouncing someone in the context of the Elvira Synod meant ratting out a fellow Christian to the Roman authorities, which quite possibly could get them killed. In that case, their excommunication was permanent.These Christians had read most of the same books of the Bible we do now (they probably had more, actually), and they knew the admonition to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's." But the Elvira Synod did not consider their truthful testimony about fellow Christians something that belonged to Caesar. Instead, snitching on fellow Christians was declared an offense against God by which a Christian risked everything, literally their eternal soul.

Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,

Glen R. Graham, Attorney at Law, Tulsa, Oklahoma

http://www.glenrgraham.com/

Returning Veterans Face Problems Upon Return --- Organizations Try to Help

Returning veterans may be in for a multitude of problems as exemplified in part by the Walter Reed Hospital scandal. Reports indicate that the Department of Veterans Affairs was ill-prepared for the sheer numbers and serious combat related and mental health and health and related issues of veterans of the Iraq and Afganistan Wars.

One issue that has yet to be addressed by the Oklahoma criminal court system is what services and special issues to deal with the special needs of veterans will the court establish (if any) to deal with the unique needs (both mental and social) of our veterans?

While military veterans represent 11 percent of the civilian adult population, they make up 26 percent of the homeless, according to data from the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Census Bureau. Counting all US veterans, 195,827 were homeless in January 2006 and an estimated 495,400 were homeless over the course of the year, the National Alliance to End Homelessness reported.

Around the country, community groups, local businesses, service organizations, clubs, and faith groups are helping build homes with special features or providing vehicles to accommodate wounded GIs.

As of November 5, 2007, the Brookings Institute is reporting 3,848 US soldiers killed, 28,451 and seriously wounded and of the 28,451 wounded, 20% have serious brain or spinal injuries (total excludes psychological injuries)

US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home

A review shows that the VA planned for a short and relatively bloodless war in Iraq, and then was slow to react when the war dragged on. In the military culture there is still a stigma attached to mental illness. Marines, especially, just aren't supposed to cry out for help.

PTSD estimates indicate the possibility that some veterans may be in for possible mental issues, depression, anxiety, outbursts, alcohol use, anti-anxiety medication, drug use, etc.

Organizations that want to help include:

America Supports You http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/

American Legion – Heroes to Hometowns (703) 908-6250 http://www.legion.org/

Checkpoint One Foundation (503) 871-3238 http://www.cponefoundation.org/

Homes for Our Troops 866-787-6677 http://www.homesforourtroops.org/

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (212) 982-9699 http://www.iava.org/

National Veterans Foundation 888-777-4443 http://www.nvf.org/

Returning Heroes Home http://www.returningheroeshome.org/

Swords to Plowshares (415) 252-4788 http://www.swords-to-plowshares.org/

US Welcome Home Foundation (520) 296-4686 http://www.uswelcomehome.org/

Veterans Outreach Center 866-906-8387 http://www.veteransoutreachcenter.org/

Veterans Village (209) 830-9955 http://www.veteransvillage.org/

Vets4Vets (520) 319-5500 http://www.vets4vets.us/