If you request your court appointed lawyer to subpoena video tapes that you think may help your case, are they required to do so?

A friend of mine is having problems with her lawyer and is being told that it is unnecessary and that she is costing the court money and will incur more legal problems if she insists..

This makes no sense to me, as I see the "logic" of her needing these tapes, they will soon be destroyed and her chance will be lost!

OH... STATE is VA

Hello A:

Her lawyer is NOT required to subpoena evidence that HE doesn't think will help.

It really doesn't matter if both of you see some logic in the tapes. It isn't YOUR (or her) logic that counts. It's the lawyers.

However, if she feels she's NOT getting the proper representation she's entitled to, she should FIRE her lawyer and hire a new one. If she decides to do that, I'll tell her how... I assume he's appointed.

But, not knowing ANYTHING about her case, I'd believe the lawyer... He really has no incentive to sell his client out. So, in the absence of evidence that he's doing so, I'd go along with him.

excon

Thanks for your response excon.

Perhaps she should fire her Court Appointed Atty. It's a she, and it seems to me that she has treated my friend as though she's 'guilty' from the start.

The tapes in question would prove beyond doubt that she is not in one location, but another on the occasion/time of the crime.
Without them, it's pretty much three teenagers lies, versus her truth.

I believe her court date is Mar 3rd, or thereabouts.
How does one, fire a Court Appointed Atty, then get another.
... without prejudice?

I don't know what you mean by without prejudice.

Anyway, she writes a letter to the Judge and asks to be assigned someone else, copy to the Attorney. No need to get into the circumstances. The Judge may remove Attorney #1 but refuse to appoint #2, advising your friend to seek personal counsel. If your friend attempts to have Attorney #1 removed and is unsuccessful, do not expect Attorney #1 to do any more or any less than her job. No jumping through hoops.

My other concern is that Attorney #1 is, in fact, an Attorney, knows what the Court listens to, knows what matters, knows the climate of that Courtroom. Your friend is not an Attorney and is just making demands that very well may hurt her. I would not DEMAND that ANYTHING be subpoenaed and would trust an Attorney, admitted to the Bar, to make the decision of what will or will not help the case.

Hello again, A:

Judy, as usual, is right on...

As I said above, (and Judy reiterated) the attorney has no incentive to sell her client out. As a matter of fact, she has an incentive to WIN. Lawyer work IS extremely competitive, and they DO keep score. Even the PD will fire somebody who looses all the time.

But, clients expect to be treated like the ones on Law and Order are. They expect meetings, and visits, and telephone calls, and their hands to be held... Besides, public defenders have a very bad reputation among prisoners, and most prisoners buy into it.

But, in the real world, it doesn't happen that way, and public defenders (as a whole) are some of the best criminal attorney's out there. They ARE underfunded and over booked. They are NOT hand holders.

But, in the final analysis, your friend is in charge of her defense. Her attorney represents HER. She certainly has the ability to plead not guilty. If she does, I promise you, the tapes WILL be subpoenaed.

But, I think your friend is confusing her attorney's ADVICE with her REFUSAL to get the tapes. I suggest that her attorney, who knows ALL the facts in the case, is ADVISING your friend to accept a plead deal. She suspects that your friend will be convicted and will face a LOOOOONG time in the slam.

She doesn't KNOW that your friend will be found guilty, but she THINKS so. And, she's probably right...

So, if your friend insists on her innocence, she should plead not guilty and throw her fate to the winds... Unless, of course, she's POSITIVE that the tapes will PROVE her innocence.

I don't know. Does she feel lucky?

excon

Thanks all.

My friend is POSITIVE that the tapes will prove her innocence!
... and the dilemma for her is that will be destroyed before her case comes to court.

My friend is thinks/feels that this Attorney has been prejudice against her from the start, believing her guilty rather than innocence until proven otherwise.

... perhaps it's just a personality clash?

Angel

Your friend has no understanding of the legal system - Attorneys who take Court-appointed cases move up the ladder based on the number of cases they WIN, not the number of cases they LOSE. Deliberately sabotaging your friend is the same as shooting yourself in the foot - it's crippling and makes no sense.

If the Attorney believes those tapes are prejudicial and admits them, the Attorney is not adequately representing his/her client.

Otherwise the choices here have been explained.

But as you note part of the trouble is that a real good defense costs money,
And most public defenders office have little or no money. If OJ for exampe had only pubic defenders his case would have lasted about 4 hours since none of that evidence that cost into the millions would have ever happened.

So if he wants those tapes really bad, he may need to provide the money for them to be bought into evidence

But believe me, if the attorney thought they proved anything he would get them if possible. Often we see here people watch law and order and think they know what works in the real courts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Angel_Wings

Thanks all.

My friend is POSITIVE that the tapes will prove her innocence!
...and the dilemma for her is that will be destroyed before her case comes to court.

My friend is thinks/feels that this Attorney has been prejudice against her from the start, believing her guilty rather than innocence until proven otherwise.

...perhaps it's just a personality clash?

Angel

---

Hello again, A:

I have no idea what your post means... Perhaps it IS a personality clash. So what? I had a lawyer once who I HATED!! He STILL did what I told him to do. He was one of the best...

We already know what both of you think... I want to know what's she's going to DO? I want to know how YOU'RE going to advise her based upon what you've learned here.

IS she going to plead not guilty?? IS she going to fire her lawyer? IS she just going to take whatever comes her way? Do you just want our sympathy?? What??

excon

I suppose part of my last post was a vent.
... but I was also responding to what had been posted.
My friend will have to keep her Atty at present.
She will OF COURSE plead not guilty.

I was having difficulty not understanding why her Atty would not subpoena the tapes.
She's accused of being in one place doing a criminal act, when she was in another place at the time in question.

The tapes prove her case.
Her case comes up early March, we were told by the store manager that the tapes would be destroyed in a month, which is the latter part of Feb!

It seems simple enough logic to me, that the Atty will not be able to request them SHOULD she need/require them as they won't exist!

I think her best course of action is to go to the store manager and ask her to hold that days tapes until after her court date. Since it is such a short period, perhaps the manager will help out, if so the tape will be there if needed.

In anycase...

Thank you all, for the help you provided.
Angel

This is what I don't understand - your friend obviously has little understanding of the legal system. A lot of people don't. She HAS an Attorney and is getting legal advice/representation, albeit it free.

The Attorney - who knows the Law and the climate of the Court - does not want to subpoena the tapes (for whatever reason).

Now your friend is going to go directly to the store and ask that the tapes be held, behind the Attorney's back (both literally and figuratively).

I have never once NOT seen this backfire when it comes to investigations. I have seen more clients "burn" themselves by getting directly involved than I can begin to count.

I also think everything that can be said has been said and it's time to close the shutters on this thread.