So how many of you have contacted a CC specialized Lawyer?

[TripleDigitRide]

He said $750-$1000. It was the guy who defended me this morning, Kooperman. I thought that was cheap enough, but there is still the problem of what happens if you win and the DA appeals, or if you lose and appeal and then and you still have the possibility that you lose which probably means you get probabtion, a record and probably hard time getting back the ability to carry a gun or maybe even own guns...

The DA doesn't have the option of appealing. Although, they could always charge you with another crime (even if they make up a crime), if only to make your life more difficult, and cost you lots of money.

Either way, it's not worth it.

***Now that I've read what everyone else had to say, I guess you knew that already.

[Guest Southron Boy]

The DA doesn't have the option of appealing. Although, they could always charge you with another crime (even if they make up a crime), if only to make your life more difficult, and cost you lots of money.

I'm an Assistant DA in a county near you. Who has time to make up charges just to hassle some otherwise law-abiding (and voting) citizen? There's more than enough legitimate crime out there, nobody's got to make anything up.

Tungsten's plan sounds like a good one.

[DaveTN]

LMAO was thinking the same thing. the DA does not get to appeal, LOL

Absolutely the DA can appeal. That is exactly what happened to me. The Judge stopped my trial while the cop was testifying and dismissed my case. No probable cause for the arrest or a search.

The DA appealed and the appellate court ruled in his favor. The case and the charges were reinstated.

[Fallguy]

Southron Boy help us out....I think there are two different situations...

In Dave's case it sounds like the DA appealed because the judge made a procedural error. Which they can do.

But the state can't appeal simply because the don't like the verdict, like a defendant can.

Right?

[Guest GLOCKGUY]

Southron Boy help us out....I think there are two different situations...

In Dave's case it sounds like the DA appealed because the judge made a procedural error. Which they can do.

But the state can't appeal simply because the don't like the verdict, like a defendant can.

Right?

dont you mean Voldemort help us out J/K

Edited May 8, 2008 by GLOCKGUY

[Guest Revelator]

Absolutely the DA can appeal. That is exactly what happened to me. The Judge stopped my trial while the cop was testifying and dismissed my case. No probable cause for the arrest or a search.

The DA appealed and the appellate court ruled in his favor. The case and the charges were reinstated.

Was it a jury trial or bench trial? Or was it a pre-trial hearing like a motion to suppress? The Staties can appeal a pre-trial ruling because jeopardy has not attached. Jeopardy attaches when, in a jury trial the jury is empaneled and sworn in, or in a bench trial when the first witness testifies. Jeopardy attaching simply means that the double jeopardy concept is in effect. There are exceptions to attachment, though. A big one is a mistrial declared because of manifest necessity. That can be anything from new evidence that could significantly impact the case to juror misconduct to a deadlocked jury. If a judge simply stops a hearing because of lack of probable cause, it sounds like it was a pre-trial suppression hearing. I have never heard of, and I would question the legality of, a judge stopping a jury trial just because they didn't like the evidence. Even in a bench trial, where the judge is the finder of fact, it sounds improper. As Fallguy said, that would be a procedural error (a very serious one) that'd be appealable.

But strange things happen in the law. It is not uniformly applied.

[Guest canynracer]

Was it a jury trial or bench trial? Or was it a pre-trial hearing like a motion to suppress? The Staties can appeal a pre-trial ruling because jeopardy has not attached. Jeopardy attaches when, in a jury trial the jury is empaneled and sworn in, or in a bench trial when the first witness testifies. Jeopardy attaching simply means that the double jeopardy concept is in effect. There are exceptions to attachment, though. A big one is a mistrial declared because of manifest necessity. That can be anything from new evidence that could significantly impact the case to juror misconduct to a deadlocked jury. If a judge simply stops a hearing because of lack of probable cause, it sounds like it was a pre-trial suppression hearing. I have never heard of, and I would question the legality of, a judge stopping a jury trial just because they didn't like the evidence. Even in a bench trial, where the judge is the finder of fact, it sounds improper. As Fallguy said, that would be a procedural error (a very serious one) that'd be appealable.

But strange things happen in the law. It is not uniformly applied.

uhhh...yeah, what HE said ^^^^^^^

[Warbird]

True it is not uniformly applied. Judges can and often do judge on whims. A judge can dismiss charges with or without prejudice. Just because charges are dropped does not mean that more evidence or an appellate court over ruling a dismissal can't lead to a reinstate of the charges. I imagine this judge saw problems coming ahead if a ruling was reached and so he dismissed the case pending new or other evidence, the higher court didn't like it and reinstated them.

But, if Dave's case went to a decision, bench or jury, then that decision if not guilty would have stood. The DA could not have appealed that. Procedural problems won't allow a not guilty verdict to be reheard, there has to be evidence of tampering or a bought off judge, the case has to be extreme. It has happened, but it is so rare as to not be worth mentioning as a typical possibility.

[robin48]

Is there a lawyer handy?

[Guest darkstar]

The DA doesn't have the option of appealing. Although, they could always charge you with another crime (even if they make up a crime), if only to make your life more difficult, and cost you lots of money.

I'm an Assistant DA in a county near you. Who has time to make up charges just to hassle some otherwise law-abiding (and voting) citizen? There's more than enough legitimate crime out there, nobody's got to make anything up.

Tungsten's plan sounds like a good one.

Who has time to make up charges? A DA that wants to get re-elected thats who. Not a big fan of elected judicial positions, or others of that type (DA, Sherrif, etc) they become political positions and in my opinion that makes them beholden to those who elect them....kinda like, well regular politicians.......

[Guest Southron Boy]

A DA can't appeal a verdict, that's what double jeopardy's all about. The State can appeal a pre-trial ruling, and even in some circumstances, a ruling made during trial.

My guess as to what happened to the poster whose case was thrown out, is that the case was dismissed at preliminary hearing, and the DA had it indicted anyway. That's pretty common, actually.

darkstar--

I agree the possibility for abuse of the system is out there. Look at that Nifong guy and the Duke lacrosse players, for example. That kind of abuse is very rare, and not the kind of thing that anybody needs to worry about too much.

[Guest darkstar]

A DA can't appeal a verdict, that's what double jeopardy's all about. The State can appeal a pre-trial ruling, and even in some circumstances, a ruling made during trial.

My guess as to what happened to the poster whose case was thrown out, is that the case was dismissed at preliminary hearing, and the DA had it indicted anyway. That's pretty common, actually.

darkstar--

I agree the possibility for abuse of the system is out there. Look at that Nifong guy and the Duke lacrosse players, for example. That kind of abuse is very rare, and not the kind of thing that anybody needs to worry about too much.

Yeah I guess you don't worry too much unless it happens to you and your good name, your finances, and your life is ruined.. I'm not saying this goes on all the time or anything but it does happen and peoples lives get ruined, for what? so someone can stay elected? Those whom are elected into positions of public trust need to be 100% above board. It's kind of a scarry thing when a guy like that Nifong decides he's gonna take the law into his own hands and does so. Don't get me wrong I'm not against the system and thinking that all judges, DA's,LEO, etc etc are crooked, but when stuff like that happens it's a black eye to said system. Rare or not, the perception becomes the reality.

[Guest atomemphis]

my pops prosecutes the crim'nals, so he will be my defense (since he is well acquainted with crim. law)

[Guest Southron Boy]

darkstar--

the only reason anybody remembers Nifong is because what he did was so unusual.

[Guest darkstar]

darkstar--

the only reason anybody remembers Nifong is because what he did was so unusual.

Very true but your gonna tell me that a DA in some other area has never pulled some other kind of stunt like that?

Sure the Nifong case got huge publicity but others have gotten nailed for stuff as well. Do a google search and you can find a bunch. Some are for crimes they committed (theft, etc) but there was one Dallas area DA recently convicted for misusing county funds and "abusing the law".

It happens...maybe not everyday but there are DA's out there that have and will trump up charges to stay elected. They are politicians at heart.

Again I'm not saying they are all crooked. But when even one DA (who has some serious power behind them to absolutely ruin a life) does something nefarious like that I see it as a huge problem. In effect the government (as represented by the DA) is comitting a crime, and destroying lives. Dunno 'bout anyone else but that, frankly, scares me. No one is above the law. No one.