Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Jamie Spencer Law Firm : DWI, DUI, Drug Possession : Serving Georgetown, Round Rock, San Marcos, Travis, Williamson, and Hays County, Texas

This week’s edition is hosted by Jeffrey Mehalic at the West Virigina Business Litigation Blog.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

“Ah. I see,” said the blind man.

When Scott prodded me earlier to redo the criminal defense related blog survey, he did it because he had run across Gideon’s post of recent public defender posts, recreated with all due Google Juice intended here:

a public defender
A Public Defender’s Life in Alaska
Abolish the Death Penalty
Arbitrary and Capricious
Between A Laugh And A Tear
Cook County Public Defenders Blog
Demonstrative Evidence
Doubtslinger
the Dream Antilles
Fifth Circuit Blog
Fourth Circuit Blog
Go West Young Tex
Indefensible
Indignant Indigent
Infinity Ranch
Ipse Dixit
Jay
Kansas Defenders
Kansas Federal Defender
Knit and the City
La Peine Forte et Dure
lawbabeak
MissTyrios dot com
Ninth Circuit Blog
Petition for Review
Preaching to the Choir
Rabid Sanity
Second Circuit Blog
Scoplaw
Sixth Circuit Blog
Swan Lake Samba Girl
Tales of a Public Defender Investigator
Tenth Circuit Blog
The Rural Bus Route
The Saucy Vixen on Life
The Underblawg
Third Circuit Blog
Woman in Black

Well the gauntlet has certainly been thrown down. Let me hear from those non-public defenders out there ASAP. (And yes, Gid, I know that’s not the whole list…)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Keeping up with all the new criminal defense blogs popping up can be quite the chore sometimes. It’s well worth the time and effort, but I can’t tell you how many times I run across someone that’s been posting for awhile that I’m just now running across.

Got a request from Simple Justice to run another Criminal Law Blog survey similar to the one I did last year. The results came in two parts and were published in June of ’07. Although originally conceived as a method to rate the “Top 10” blogs, I ended up listing 23 blogs over the two part results posts.

I’m going to do it a little differently this time around. To heck with a rating system, or a Top 10, or Top 100. Just send me the name and URL of every good criminal defense type blog you read regularly or subscribe. And of course, don’t forget to tell me who you are. Everyone will get listed.

You could tell me just to count everyone in your blogroll, if you must, but let’s face it – blogrolls get a little stale. Do me a favor and cull through the best of them, by which I mostly mean those that still publish somewhat regularly. 

You can leave a comment on this post, or better still just email me at jamie@austindefense.com.  Bonus points – which to be perfectly fair are worth nothing except they’ll help me compile this list – are given to folks who mention that I am running this survey on their own blogs. (Don’t forget to email me and let me know you’ve done that.)

I’ll post the results in 2 weeks, and depending on how fast and furious the responses come in, possibly sooner, and possibly after that as well. How’s that for a really strict set of rules and guidelines. 

As always, professor blogs, law student blogs, and yes those oh-so-few prosecutor blogs are being sought after too, so give me a shout out, and let me know what you’re reading out there.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks (1)

Or at least this is the first time I ever noticed someone Googling “Blawgosphere”.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

…I’d be emailing Robert Guest and asking to join the Kaufman County Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Association. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

“Hi, Dennis.”

Bumped into fellow Austin criminal defense lawyer Jon Evans in the courthouse last week, and he had just looked me right in the eyes and said, “Hi, Dennis”.

I’ve known Jon for as long as I’ve been a lawyer. He officed upstairs in the old Stewart Title Building when I was first out of law school and practicing on the first floor. He had only been practicing for about 5-6 years at the time, but he was already one of the most seasoned trial lawyers in Austin.

That was more than ten years ago. We have enjoyed each other’s company while standing in line chatting about interesting issues and recent cases and the like. 

And I’m 100% certain he knows my name is “Jamie”. But he said, “Hi Dennis”. He also had that Jon Evans grin.

I said “Hunh?” (I am getting a bit deaf in my middle age.)

“Hi, Dennis. You’re Dennis Toad right?”

Ahhhhh. I see said the blind man. Jon thought I was the anonymous author of a new “blog” that had appeared recently in the Austin blogosphere: “Austin Law News”. The author is listed as “Dennis Toad” but s/he has clearly gone to great lengths to remain anonymous – some would say “with good reason”.

Taint me.

One of my other accusers (there’s been more than Jon) pointed out to me that if it were my doing, then I would still be denying it to his face. Probably true, but it’s still not me.

I have my suspicions, but I’ll keep them to myself (unless you want to walk up to me in the courthouse and talk to me in semi-private about it).

So… Dennis Toad, please email me anonymously if you wish, but tell me…

Who are you?

UPDATE: Keith Lauerman isn’t Dennis Toad either.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

This is an experiment. OK – it’s a Cinco de Mayo fueled experiment.

There’s some odd bloglike but not quite a blog site out there named NorthLoop Neighborhoods that seems to cut and paste pieces of ACDL and post them without comment.

I’m posting this at 11:16 P.M. to see whether NorthLoop Neighborhoods picks it up, and if it does, how quickly it does it.

Update: It took about 45 minutes for NorthLoop to post this.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

Blogrolling ACDL… Thanks go out to the following blogs that have recently added permanent links, linked to me in a post of their own, linked to my DWI blog or commented on recent posts:

• Waco Criminal Law Blog
• Exposed
• Sex Crimes
• The Mommy Blog
• May It Please The Court
• Eye on Williamson
• Georgia DUI Law Blog
• Condo & HOA Law Blog
• Election Journal
• Georgia DUI Blog

And here are some other interesting blogs I’ve been following recently:

• Off the Kuff
• The Legal Satyricon
• Judgment Day
• Norm Pattis
• Hick Town Rap Star

As always, I’ve likely missed some folks, so please email me if you’d like to be included in the next edition of Austin Criminal Defense Blogrolling.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

I often get asked by new criminal law bloggers how best to get noticed by other bloggers so that they can get linked to. Actually there’s an easy answer: link out to others, and they will start reading your blog and link back to you.

While you’re at it, feel free to let the person you’re linking to know it in an email. They may not have noticed (although, as you get more and more into blogging, you’ll start to recognize when folks do). Here’s an email exchange from a relatively new blogger that is already posting frequent high quality content:

Jamie,

I’ve just started a new blog, Mississippi Criminal Defense Law Blog, www.mscriminallawblog.com, and wanted to reach out to you for any advice or comments you might have on blogging on the topic of criminal law.  I’ve been reviewing your posts and with permission will start making some comments on a few in the future.  I have also linked to your sites on my blogroll – I hope that is okay.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

--
Kevin W. Frye
Attorney at Law

My answer:

First and foremost, never ask permission to link to me: just do it!

Haha.  No, but seriously, thank you, and by the way, linking out to others is the best, quickest, easiest way to get them to notice you and to get them to link back to you.

And feel free to grab snippets of what folks say (yes, me included) and comment on why it is wrong as well as why it is 'right'.  It helps a little if I actually am wrong, but again, in the practical blawgosphere, that's more than welcome.

Blogging is a discussion - either in the comments section, or between blogs.

You've definitely got a good start.  I'll be linking to you in my next edition of "blogrolling" - if not before then.

Thanks for the email, and by the way, at the beginning, feel free to email folks when you link to them (you won't need to do it with me - I'm subscribing to your blog now, and I would have seen it anyway on Technorati) - but I mean don't feel bashful if you link to someone and you want them to know you did.

Finally, permission (and you should ask permission for this one) to reprint your email to me?  And my response to you?  I'll include a link about your new blog of course, but probably post it as "advice to new criminal defense bloggers".  Or I can just leave you out of it and anon-o-mize it.

Good luck.  Looking forward to more posts from you.

Jamie

Perhaps it’s not obvious, but just in case, let me add “reprinted with permission”.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Ken Lammers at CrimLaw will be happy to know that the list of prosecutor blogs just keeps growing and growing.

I should have thrown A Harris County Lawyer into the mix a long time ago. And I’ve recently run across “da blog” written by an anonymous “assistant district attorney in a large, metropolitan city”. My guess? That city is likely Houston, and definitely in Texas.

Any other blogging prosecutors please email me or comment sometime so I’ll be sure to know about you.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Blogrolling ACDL… Thanks go out to the following blogs that have recently added permanent links, linked to me in a post of their own, linked to my DWI blog or commented on recent posts:

• Mississippi Criminal Defense Law Blog
• South Texas Defense
• The Peace Train
• Bloggin’ for Wedding Vendors
• California Blog of Appeal
• Law Department Search
• The Muckraker
• Donna Says
• The Stark Raving Viking
• Life at the Harris County Criminal Justice Center

And here are some other interesting blogs I’ve been following recently:

• The Unapologetic Mexican
• Sexual Intelligence
• Unqualified Offerings
• Curia Advisari Vult
• The Local Crank
• Folo

As always, I’ve likely missed some folks, so please email me if you’d like to be included in the next edition of Austin Criminal Defense Blogrolling.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

This week’s blawg review is up at California Blog of Appeal.

And from Ken Lammers, this week’s edition of Crim Law TV. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Just noticed that New York criminal defense lawyer Scott Greenfield has signed up to do a Blawg Review in July. Excellent – looking forward to it.

Other criminal law bloggers out there – maybe even a prosecutor for a change – should seriously consider signing up as well. I can tell you the one I did definitely took some time and effort, but it was worth it.

For Pete’s sake!  Criminal defense (and, yes, prosecution) is inherently more interesting than Bankruptcy, Divorce, Labor Law, Mediation, Patent Law – more interesting than every other kind of law there is to practice.

Let’s get some more defenders signed up to host…

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Houston Criminal Defense Lawyer**[see first comment] Mark Bennett pokes some good natured fun at me about a recent post and lists some of the phrases where he covets high Google SERPs:

Austin criminal defense lawyer Jamie Spencer talks about “how to rank high on Google’s natural results.”

I have heard — and it makes sense — that a page that uses the phrase “Houston criminal defense lawyer” or “Houston criminal defense attorney” will rank higher on Google than a page by a Houston lawyer that talks about criminal defense trial lawyering without those words strung together in that order, even though it’s not usually necessary for a Houston lawyer practicing criminal defense to use the words “Houston criminal defense” in a post about the subject.

I’d like Defending People to pop up at the top of a Google search for “Houston criminal defense lawyer” or “Houston criminal attorney,” but blatantly inserting those phrases into a post has always seemed a bit obnoxious. Your thoughts?

[Do I need to reiterate? He’s poking fun at me.]

And what’s his ranking on the phrases he listed? 

Houston criminal defense lawyer: #9. Houston criminal defense attorney: #26. Houston lawyer practicing criminal defense: #11. Houston criminal defense: #18. Houston criminal attorney: #9.

Not bad. Several of those are already on the first page of the results. Some aren’t. But numero uno is always best right? If it ain’t obvious, yes I’m handing out some link love – but, Mark writes a great blog, and recently his RSS feed changed requiring that you reup your subscription – so I’m only trying to help him out , aight? Let’s check back in 6 months and do an update on those numbers, shall we?

On a related note, Dave Matson of High Steppin’ Searches left a comment on that same post:

Certainly it's pretty difficult to rank well without quality content, but the measure of that is links.

Having a quality blog means other quality blogs and sites with credibility link to you. Authority bestows authority.

Being widely blogrolled is a huge benefit to your rankings. And that wouldn't be the case if you didn't write things that people think are worth linking to.

Of course, being on the LexBlog network of blogrolls doesn't hurt, either.

I agree. When folks call me to ask me about LexBlog, “being added to the blogroll” is one of the benefits I list. And no, I don’t get any kickbacks from Kevin for tooting their horn – I actually like talking about blogging, perhaps because it was one more way to postpone actually doing it.

But ‘just’ being added to the blogroll won’t get you anywhere really – not in the long run. As Dave says, you’ve got to write stuff folks think is worth posting about. Google ranks that higher than anything else. In fact, out in SEO land speculation is that they recently changed the algorithm to lower the value of blogroll links.

Having something you actually wrote cut and pasted and then commented on will do you a lot more good. And, that takes us back to rule #1: content, content, content.

Defending People is all about content. Mark ranks as high as he does now based entirely on that. The others in front of him, for now, have SEO folks getting backlinks from other sites, but that won’t defeat good content in the long run.

On a completely side note, if I don’t want to start ranking ‘high’ in the Google SERPs for stuff like Austin SEO, and Texas search engine optimization, I need to get back to substantive defense blogging. It’s fine to take a sabbatical, and start blogging about blogging, but at some point, I’ve got to remember why I started this whole thing in the first place.

With that in mind, I’m about to pen a post I’ve been thinking ages about. So without further ado, here’s a self link to:

My Own Personal Shoplifting Experience.

Enough about ‘blawgs’. Back to criminal defense. If I use the word Google in my next 50 posts, somebody just shoot me. Even I’m tired of the topic by now.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Blogrolling ACDL… Thanks go out to the following blogs that have recently added permanent links, linked to me in a post of their own or commented on recent posts:

• Rabid Sanity
• Android’s Reminiscences
• Power of Attorney: Not Happy at the Bar
• Iowa Champion
• Washington Criminal Defense
• Not Guilty
• Massachusetts Driving Laws
• What's My Exposure

Stole the idea from Evan Schaffer’s Legal Underground. Evan makes sure to return link love on a regular basis by having a frequent ‘Blogrolling’ post.

I do check Technorati for recent bloggers who have linked to me, but please also feel free to email me if you add me to your blogroll, or link to me in a post. I’m thinking I can make a twice monthly feature out of this.

And, since this a new feature, and I’m certain I haven’t gotten around to doing it for everyone I should, please let me know if U’ve left you out in the past – or just would like to be reincluded in the future.

I know in the back of my mind I’m leaving some people out – so again… email me.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Erstwhile defense attorney and current prosecutor/blogger Ken Lammers points to Western Justice, a relatively new prosecutor in the practical blawgosphere:

Cool, we're now up to 3 prosecutors who actually blawg about *GASP* criminal law.

I’m pretty sure Ken is including himself, Western, and of course, Tom McKenna at Seeking Justice. (Since Tom’s URL is ConfoundingTheWicked.blogspot, here’s some too old to still be under copyright Mozart for the classical music lovers out there.)

Let me throw Joel Jacobsen’s erudite Judging Crimes into that mix as well. It’s from a prosecutor’s point of view, and worth an addition to any criminal lawyer’s RSS reader.

Ken points out that both Western Justice and Defending People “share an affinity” for the same painting, Pollice Verso, so how about some prosecutorial props for Dallas Sidebar – and of course his masthead: Raphael’s Judgment of Solomon.

By the way, Mark has revamped his site recently, so the thumbs up/thumbs down painting is less recognizable- but more importantly, jury consultant Anne Reed reminds me to remind my readers that you need to resubscribe to Mark’s blog since he moved to WordPress. If “Blog or Government Propaganda Tool” is the last item in your reader, you are literally 50+ posts behind.

Back to prosecutors… Sarena Straus found a new prosecutor blogger in ‘You… For the People’ – but I fear that ‘You’ may have suffered the typical two posts and out fate that many bloggers suffer. Meanwhile, Sarena mostly tells us about her post prosecutorial upcoming TV appearances – such as this one:

We will be discussing the case of Jennifer Latham. Latham kidnapped an infant from a Florida hospital and was apprehended a short time later.

The judge, believing that Latham had no prior convictions, agreed to release her without bail on the condition that she wear an ankle bracelet with a GPS. It was later discovered that Latham had a criminal record in another state.

We will be discussing whether the judge's decision was appropriate. I'm sure you can guess what my position is....

I’ll cop to not seeing the show, but since I was asked to guess, let me surmise that her position was… “You’ve got to keep people in jail until you absolutely confirm that they have no prior history anywhere.” And then perhaps… “Once you confirm that there is no prior history, keep them in jail anyway, because you can’t ever actaully prove a negative”?

So Ken’s mostly right. There aren’t many prosecutor blogging about criminal law and almost nothing but criminal law. But I think there are more than three.

Anyone else out there subscribe to some that I haven’t mentioned?  And any prosecutors out there starting a blog, please feel free to email me, I'll be happy to give your new blog a little link love.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

Fellow blogging Texas lawyer Todd Smith already said it best, so this is just a cut and paste:

Kevin O'Keefe of LexBlog recently started a group on LinkedIn to try and connect with more folks in the legal industry who have an interest in blogging.  The group is already up to about 350 members and could eventually grow into the thousands.

Kevin says he's going to focus the group on ways to exchange information about blogging.  If you're on LinkedIn (I am, and you can view my profile here), then click through to Kevin's post and join.  And if you don't know Kevin, you should.  He really knows his stuff.

Requires signing up for LinkedIn – of course – but that’s already reconnected me to several folks I knew from a long time back. Basically I’m looking forward to 2 things. Subscribing to good blogs I didn’t know about, and yes, of course, the potential for link love.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

A Harris County Lawyer (yes, that’s the name – it’s an anonymous blogger – probably a prosecutor in the Harris County D.A.’s Office) objects to the ‘fear mongering” on fellow defense lawyer Mark Bennett’s blog:

Okay, I don't know how long this has been up on Bennett's website, but I just noticed this blurb he has in the upper right-hand corner:

Defending People is about protecting the people, one at a time, from the only viable threat to their liberty: their government.

Um, isn't he the one who has been blasting prosecutors for instilling fear in people?

I plan to fully investigate this, but right now, I'm hiding under my covers because the government is trying to get me.

This actually has to do with AHCL’s unwavering support of Kelly Siegler for Harris County DA, and refers to Bennett’s post about Siegler’s fearmongering.

But, while AHCL is on the subject, what’s wrong with Mark’s tag line?

Murderers (some would argue the State included) can take your life.

Thieves can take your property.

You can forfeit your own dignity.

But who besides the government can take your liberty?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Larry King interviewed the apoplectic comedian Lewis Black tonight on CNN (30 minutes past the end of the broadcast and it’s still not linkable – is this the internet age or not? No seriously, I’ll try to link to it when it’s available.)

Last question from Larry was about whether or not the rumor was true: had Black started a blog? Absolutely not. “I refuse to blog,” said Black, continuing:

…just because you can type on a screen doesn’t give you legitimacy as an authority on anything.

King: Anyone can blog, right? [Typically sycophantic, notice how Larry turns from being willing to plug Black’s hypothetical new non-existent blog to immediately bashing the concept for blogging itself – based, of course, on his guest’s answer.]

Black: Everybody does! [Minor epileptic fit ensues.] …you used to have to put up a degree!

He’s right of course. 

You’re going to have a hard time blogging regularly about a subject that you don’t know anything about. And while you know everything about your own personal life, and are therefore immediately the world’s foremost expert on everything relevant to your own personal diary-type blog, that’s not true for ‘professional’ blogging.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

David Terrell has moved “In the Moment” to a new address, while keeping the name of the blog. Robert Guest starts over as “Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer”. (Given the lack of originality of my own blog’s name, I suppose am not allowed to join the chorus of blawgers who lament Guest’s abandonment of “I Was The State”.)

Both of these guys are must-subscribes in any criminal defense lawyer’s RSS reader, so make sure to update accordingly.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Part II of Naming Names and Plagiarism in Criminal Defense Blogs

In Part I we covered lawyers who cut and paste news articles without attribution, and without any thought to the potential effects on some other criminal defense lawyer’s client.

Windy Pundit covered part II, sploggers, better than I could in a comment on a Simple Justice post. (But it wouldn’t be much of a post if I didn’t add some of my own thoughts anyway.)

A few background details. Blogging on Blogger is free. TypePad is cheap. And, aside from the hosting cost if you put it on a custom URL, WordPress is also free and it’s fancier than Blogger; but it requires a modicum of computer know how, in terms of installing the software, etc. (The use of the word ‘modicum’ is not meant in a derogatory fashion – I’ve never set up a WordPress blog, and I might or might not be able to do so easily.)

The point is, setting up a blog is somewhere between inexpensive and free.

Then we add internet juggernaut Google to the mix. Google makes the bulk of its money from the sponsored results section that appears above most internet searches. The advertising program is called AdWords. Every time someone googles a phrase and clicks on the sponsored result, Google gets paid. If there are multiple folks bidding for higher placement, Google gets paid even more.

To increase the number of people who are exposed to AdWords, Google implemented the AdSense program. Through AdSense, anyone can place AdWords on their site, and receive a portion of the click-through price from Google. (I think it’s 5 or 10%, but I don’t feel like looking it up.)

Google owns the Blogger platform – so it made it easy for users to place AdSense ads on that free platform.

The result was predictable. Folks from literally all over the world starting setting up blogs for the sole purpose of earning a small percentage of the advertising revenue. And a new word was born as well: splogs – short for spam blogs.

I am somewhat familiar with this phenomenon by chance. A large portion of my practice involves representing folks charged with DWI, and I practice in Austin, Texas. In September of 2006, a year and a half ago now, an article was written on a ‘how to make money by blogging’ blog, entitled, “Highest Paying Adsense Keyword: DWI Austin”.

At that time, advertisers in this market were bidding as high as $82.95 per click for anyone who was searching google with those two words. (Looks like it has since fallen to the uber-reasonable rate of merely $51.00, while the mesothelioma lawyers have taken over most of the top 20 spots.)

This all happened because a bidding war broke out between DWI lawyers in Austin who all decided to advertise on Google, roughly at about the same time. Then many of them decided they wanted to be number one. Simple economics tells us this drove the bidding price up, up and away.

Since I also author a ‘DWI Blog’ along with this one, sploggers started cutting and pasting my articles on their money making blogs. Didn’t matter that I don’t advertise; my site comes up pretty high for a variety of searches using the important (i.e., high paying) keywords.

Robert Guest, of the newly minted Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog, ran across a blog that had copied some of my posts wholesale, and alerted me to it in the comment section of one of my posts. Nothing I can do about it.

Except call the sploggers what they are: plagiarists.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

Houston defense attorney Mark Bennett is understandably outraged to see that fellow criminal law blogger David Finn has reproduced the Department of Justice’s press release about Mark’s client as his own work. Mark’s concern, as always, is for his own client, who thanks to this “Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer” has his name besmirched before a jury can even be selected. 

Others might consider it unseemly to not even attribute the DOJ in the post, not to link to the original, not even to indent someone else’s words as is customary in blogging etiquette. No, this is all under the banner of the “Personal Online Journal of David Finn”.

Meanwhile New York defense lawyer Scott Greenfield recently groused about his original writings being bastardized as unintelligible garbage in random blogs. He first thought the culprit was the blogging platform WordPress, but Windy Pundit cleared up the misunderstanding in a comment. Turns out it was just another splog.

These two instances are related, and they illustrate the 2 types of bad and/or useless blogs in the criminal blawgosphere:

1. Lawyers that don’t know or understand the purpose of blogging.
2. Folks trying to monetize a cheap/free site quickly, using Google’s AdSense program.

Category Number One: the Lawyers.

These are lawyers who have contacted (or been contacted by) some Search Engine Optimization genius, who tells them that blogs are the latest thing. 

“It’s all about content. Frequently changing and updating content on your site. That’s what Google values the most. That’s what a blog is,” says our easily imaginable SEO expert.

So the web designer sets up a ‘blog’ for the defense lawyer, and tells him, “Take snippets from the local news and post regularly.” Soemtimes the webmeister advises the potential client to “comment on the story”.

Perhaps that saves Finn from the plagiarism charge. Referring, apparently, to federal indictments relating to mortgage fraud, he prefaces the cut-and-paste with the pithy phrase, “Expect to see more of this in 2008”. So at least that’s original.

But, ignoring Bennett’s point about criminal defense lawyers doing the government’s dirty work for the, I still don’t get it. This blog is clearly being used as a marketing tool and exists for that purpose alone. There’s no insight or commentary. Nothing. 

The part that confuses me is this: would someone being investigated or perhaps already indicted by the Federal Government run across this site? Potentially yes. Would they say to themselves, what, I don’t know, “I want to hire the guy who repeats the federal prosecutor’s propaganda? Give me the guy who names defendants in his blog.”? 

I would think not.  So, never mind the ethics of plagiarism, how effective a marketing tool could it be? 

Category Number Two: the sploggers.

Written after the fact, and now contained in a separate post.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

So, Sally Field didn’t actually say, “You like me, you really really like me”…but

It does feel good to have been called out by a few folks for my light blogging recently; since you asked, I’ll try to do better.

Update: Fantastic.  The Texas Tornado (mis)characterizes this post as 'a promise to blog more'.  Fine.  I'll get back at it.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Scott probably meant it (at least partly) tongue in cheek, but hey, a good idea is a good idea:

The string of recent corruption stories coming out of Texas cities and law enforcement around the state makes me think the topic nearly deserves its own independent blog: No doubt you could productively focus on the topic full time.

Seriously. Someone out there is looking for a good blog niche. I’d add it to my RSS reader.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As lawyers in Pakistan take to the streets to protest President Musharraf’s declaration of martial law a state of emergency, Steanso wonders how American lawyers would react to the same set of circumstances:

It kind of makes me wonder what would happen in this country if the president were to suddenly implement martial law and suspend all of our civil rights. I guess it would be a fair bet that certain groups would take to the streets in protest, but I have a hard time believing that American lawyers would be amongst the people leading the charge…

[I]f the American legal system were to come under attack, American lawyers would mostly file lawsuits and write angry letters. If that wasn't effective, they'd mostly throw up their hands and start retraining themselves for some other line of white collar work.

Maybe PR, marketing, or sales. I'm not sure American lawyers would be willing to march or take a baton to the head in defense of our legal system.

First, I should thank Jason for being kind enough to exempt me from this indictment, even if it was partly (wholly?) tongue-in-cheek.

His hypothetical is somewhat hard to imagine, despite our President’s suspension of some of our most important civil rights. As bad as the prior few years have been for civil liberties, I still think it’s difficult for us to really imagine what it must be like to live in an overt dictatorship.

Ralph Nader recently addressed this issue in a piece published on CounterPunch: “Where Are the Lawyers of America?”

I have been asking lawyers why they do not become directly active in challenging what they themselves believe is a reckless above-the-law Presidency and its enormous concentration of unlawful power…

It is up to the lawyers to rally for the Republic. This is deep patriotism, for without upholding our constitution, and the laws of the land, what will become of our country?

If Nader is correct that lawyers haven’t done enough to challenge the administration’s abuse of power so far, could Steans be right that lawyers would be too apathetic to fight when martial law comes to America?

I think the real answer is that lawyers are like everyone else. Some are lazy, some hard working; some are unethical, some very principled. The range of adjectives that can be used to describe people in general can just as easily modify ‘American lawyers’.

Some lawyers would protest vigorously, while others would do little to nothing.

N.B. The League of Melbotis adds a comment to Jason’s post challenging me, “I would like to see Jamie take on "The Man" in a more direct fashion. Fight the power, Jamie.”

League! Right now, being a criminal defense lawyer is the best way I know how to fight the man. Got any better suggestions?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Seriously, anyone that reads this blog on a regular basis, please head over to the 2007 Weblog Awards and vote for Scott Greenfield’s Simple Justice in the best law blog category.

#1) Scott/Simple Justice deserves it on the merits.

#2) Criminal defense lawyer blogging is still in its infancy; those of us that are interested need to promote it.

Yes, I’m attempting to stuff the ballot box. I’ll be voting once a day, as the rules allow. All I’m asking is that you log in and cast your ballot at least once.

Heck, the other finalists all are fine candidates:

Above the Law
How Appealing
Volokh Conspiracy
Sui Generis
Balkinization
Wall Street Journal Law Blog
SCOTUS Blog
Likelihood Of Confusion
Ms JD Changing the Face of the Legal Profession

Several, in fact, are on my RSS reader. But there’s a reason that Hollywood puts out TV shows and movies about criminal prosecution and defense, and ignores bankruptcy, divorce and other civil lawyers… it’s boring.

Scott writes interesting topical posts several times a day, on a subject we are all interested in, no matter what our profession. Vote now.

I'll make you a deal.  Leave me a comment (or email me) after you vote for Simple Justice, and I'll make sure to link back to your blog over the next month or so.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

Anne Reed tagged me (and thanks for the compliment) in her Simply the Best meme, and asks that I pay it forward. I feel a bit like Robert Ambrogi, who said about being an earlier victim of the original tagger – the anonymous Blawg Review editor:

I truly hate these things. The editor of Blawg Review (who I don't hate) has started a meme he calls Simply the Best. He's tagged his top 10 law blogs; each of them, in turn, is supposed to tag theirs, and so on, until we end up with one great big group hug. I've now been tagged -- by both J. Craig Williams and Monica Bay -- and had to think long and hard before joining in. (Legal Blog Watch, where I co-blog with Carolyn Elefant, has also been tagged.

Here's the problem: My feedreader tells me that I subscribe to the RSS feeds of roughly 350 blogs. Those are the ones I at least scan on a regular basis. Almost every day, it seems, I discover yet another blog that I like. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of really good blogs out there. To pick 10 from among them is somewhat arbitrary and certainly capricious.

OK, so I don’t really hate memes – I just used that block quote to tag some more folks I could have included in my list. Yes, that’s cheating. It allows to me to tag more than ten blawgers. But it’s hard to pare this down to 10.

And I’m going to cheat some more by disqualifying Defending People and Simple Justice for the same reason that Anne did, that is, that she had meme’d them earlier this week. Well, actually I’m probably disqualifying them for the real reason that she did: more cheating and it allows for more in the list. Heck, if I’m gonna think like that, I may as well disqualify Gideon and Capital Defense Weekly just because they made Anne’s list. And Doug Berman for making the original list.

Alright, enough stalling/cheating. Here’s my ‘I wish I had more spots’ and in no particular order top 10:

• Underdog Blog
• The Matlock Blog
• Drug WarRant
• I Was the State
• California DUI Blog
• Grits for Breakfast
• Blonde Justice
• The Defense Perspective
• Real Lawyers Have Blogs

And polishing it off, neither a law nor even a lawyer blog, just a guy that blogs about how to blog, which all blogging lawyers can use…

• Copyblogger

There you go. Also, I left out about 30-70. But those I named must press on…

Update: Others have joined in.

May It Please the Court, The Common Scold, The UCL Practitioner, Robert Ambrogi's LawSites, Where's Travis McGee?, What About Clients?, New York Personal Injury Law Blog, Overlawyered, TalkLeft, Lowering the Bar, Charon QC, Arbitrary and Capricious, Binary Law, Sui Generis, Nearly Legal, Legal Blog Watch, StandDown Texas Project, Minor Wisdom, Family Lore, Law School Innovation, GeekLawyer, lo-fi librarian, China Law Blog, More Partner Income, Patent Baristas, The California Blog of Appeal, Decision of the Day, QuizLaw, f/k/a

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Anne Reed of Deliberations writes this week’s edition of Blawg Review: “The 17 Best Tips for Voir Dire”.

Sure, it’s a way to theme an excellent Blawg Review, but here are some of my favorites, renumbered, and in no particular order:

1. Assume Nothing
2. Watch for Points of View
3. Notice How They Process Information
4. Pay Attention to the Quiet Ones
5. Some Just Want To Get Back to Work

Paying attention to the quiet ones in jury selection really hits home. How many times do you realize that after you and the prosecutor have fought over challenges for cause, then submitted your preemptory challenges, and the panel is called to be seated that… up to half the jury consists of those that managed to keep their mouths shut most of the time?

I guess that’s because the ones that weren’t quiet managed to put fear into one side or the other.

Next week’s Blawg Review host is Lex Ferenda, and Anne has set a high bar.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

If you don’t count hosting Blog Review, or my Criminal Law Blog Poll, it’s been awhile since I’ve done one of these, so here goes:

Shawn Matlock writes about the ‘Business of Winning’ criminal cases, and Stephen Gustitis follows up with ‘Adjusting Client Expectations’. Jon Katz’ philosophy of winning is all about t’ai chi.

Robert Guest posts on DWI propaganda and what prosecutors are taught about DWI. Hunter Biederman reports on CMI’s refusal (so far) to comply with court orders that they turn over the source code for the mysterious Intoxilyzer 5000. And Steven Eversole asks us whether there’s a presumption of innocence or guilt in DUI cases.

Mark Bennett writes related posts on ‘Managing the Risk of Child Sex Abuse’ and ‘We Predators’.

Ed Chernoff tells us about a late Friday phone call he got. You know the kind: the Friday before trial the prosecutor calls to tell you that every single co-defendant has reached a last minute plea agreement to testify against your client in a massive Federal drug conspiracy case.

 Brian Tannebaum lists some failures in the criminal defense system.

Mark Jakubik chimes in on the recent blawgosphere debate about whether criminal defense lawyers can be ‘conservatives’.

Overcriminalized, which has plenty of grist from Texas to talk about, notes that other states are not immune from overreacting to non-criminal situations.

Scott Greenfield talks about the Dream Team phenomenon.

And White Collar Crime Prof Blog predicts that shenanigans involving Iraq rebuilding contracts will become the new goldmine for Federal white collar criminal defense attorneys.

[Let me add: the ‘full’ results of the Criminal Law Blog Poll have not yet been posted, inasmuch as I still need to complete the task by adding a few more posts with links to all responders. Fear not, it’s in the proverbial ‘to do’ list.]

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I’m late with the shout out on this one, but we have another Texas lawyer hosting Blawg Review.   Another Austin lawyer at that (although, dear readers, he's clearly of the civil, not the criminal defense variety).

And you’ve got to love appellate law specialist D. Todd Smith’s title for this week’s edition:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE BLAWGOSPHERE
_________
No. 07-123
 _________
In re Blawg Review

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks (1)

The LAPD has recently started a blog. Makes me wonder when or whether Austin Police Department, or perhaps some other Texas city police department will…

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Well, in part.  This is my first blog post from my new MacBook Pro laptop.  I've only had it a few days, but as a long time PC guy (well, lifelong) I have to say that I'm pleased so far.  My office desktop is still a PC, but when it comes time for a new computer... well, we'll just have to see.

Might make the complete switch before then, you never know.

Thanks go out to fellow bloggers Grant Griffiths and Ben Stevens for helping me make the (partial) switch.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

Welcome to Blawg Review Number 117: the Bill of Rights/Criminal Law Edition.

Approximately 5% of previous Blawg Review hosts have blogs related to criminal law, and not all of them practice and/or blog exclusively about criminal defense: Appellate Law & Practice, Crime and Federalism, JAG Central, Blonde Justice, Concurring Opinions, and Public Defender Stuff.

This week, I will supplement the usual suspects’ contributions (i.e. posts from Civil Lawyers) with a healthy dose from around the bourgeoning criminal law blogosphere. I hope that criminal defense attorneys will consider hosting Blawg Review in future editions. At the very least, criminal law bloggers should consider submitting their best posts on a weekly basis.

Last week’s host, Corporate Law UK, wrote the Review in iambic pentameter (and possibly inspired Nate Oman’s entry this week about the demise of wigs in the British legal profession). Alas, poetry is well beyond my talents, so we shall have to settle on a different theme.

I decided to use the six amendments from the Bill of Rights that most apply to criminal defense, highlight a historic Supreme Court criminal case, and use the text of the Amendment itself as the springboard for this week’s featured posts. [Civil lawyers need not worry… I found ways to work your submissions in.]

Here goes…

THE FIRST AMENDMENT

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) The Supreme Court affirms that flag burning is protected speech under the 1^st Amendment. Many forget that this is indeed an important criminal case. This wasn’t a case of prior restraint…. Johnson had originally been sentenced to one year in jail for the overtly political statement consisting of burning the flag outside the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Justice Brennan authored the 5-4 decision.

Freedom of Speech

The patients' bill of rights is a fluid concept, from state to state, and hospital to hospital, but it usually includes the right to clear communication about his or her treatment options, free from governmental interference. David Harlow discusses amendments to the Stark self referral rules, dealing with how clear communication about recommended procedures could be clouded by a physician's financial interest in the referral. [Off topic note: please consider sponsoring David as he bicycles 200 miles in 2 days this summer to raise money for cancer research and treatment.]

Free speech is great, of course, but would it matter if no one were listening? Dave Hoffman starts a flurry with his post entitled “The Flat Legal Blogosphere, and What to Do About It”. Eric Turkewitz was listening, as evidenced by his post “Is the Blawgosphere Stagnating?” PrawfsBlawg talks about the future of legal blogging. Next Simple Justice responds, and then Mark Bennett. Hoffman writes more on the topic, and asks us to consider “Why do Lawyers Blog?” I’d argue that this blogversation itself provides proof of a vibrant legal blogging community. Indeed, people are listening.

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963)  The Supreme Court declares that narcotics seized from an illegal search were the “fruit of the poisonous tree” because none of it would have “come to light but for the illegal actions of the police”.

Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Kansas Defenders reports on an appellate decision that found a pat-down search unreasonable.

Defending folks charged with possession of marijuana, and other controlled substances requires a thorough knowledge of Search and Seizure law, and the ability to successfully argue Motions to Suppress the Evidence. But for now, a short detour into the world of bloggers who would like to see the ‘War on Drugs’ ended in the first place.

Pete Guither writes a letter to the DEA protesting the threatened asset forfeiture against the building owners where medical marijuana dispensaries are housed in Los Angeles.

Blame the Drug War wonders whether her anti-Drug War activism does any good.

Blog Reload brings us his Marijuana News Roundup.

Radley Balko focuses on the over-criminalization of pain medication in his House Crime Subcommittee post.

And for those who think being anti-Drug War is solely a cover for prejudice against the police be sure to subscribe to the Law Enforcement Against Prohibition blog.

THE FIFTH AMENDMENT

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) To insure protection of the right not to incriminate oneself, the Supremes proscribe the prophylactic remedy now known as the Miranda warnings, or, said in plain English…the police must advise someone in custody of their rights before questioning them. Little known fact? Miranda was retried without the illegally obtained evidence, and reconvicted.

Indictment by Grand Jury

The accuser has supposedly repressed the memory of the unprovable crime for 32 years, but reported it to the police recently. Three days before the State dismissed the case, Simple Justice blasts the District Attorney’s Office for indicting a man when they knew they didn’t have enough evidence to convict. Despite the dismissal of charges, Scott’s original point remains true: the damage to reputation is unfortunately permanent.

Double Jeopardy

Penny Umstattd-Cope reviews an interesting Double Jeopardy decision from Missouri State Court. The defendant was retried after a successful appeal, and argued that his second jury should have been instructed to limit their punishment range based on the first (reversed) case. The Appellate Court disagreed.

Compelled to be a Witness against Himself

Rob Leonard notes that 30 hours of police interrogation can easily produce false confessions – in this case, one that lead to wrongful imprisonment for 22 years.

The opposite of “not being compelled to be a witness against yourself” is often “interrogation” or “torture,” and Marty Lederman collects a compendium of Op-Ed pieces on those subjects written by Jack Balkin.

Shawn Matlock points out that since we have a 5^th Amendment, you ought to use it.

Miranda Rights

Randy England answers the question all criminal defense lawyers hear: “The police didn’t read me my rights. Will they drop the charge?”

Appellate Law & Practice applauds the California First for affirming the suppression of un-Mirandized statements, and resisting the urge to find some sort of “the Defendant is a bad guy” exception.

THE SIXTH AMENDMENT

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) Denied access to a lawyer, forced to defend himself and sentenced to five years in prison, Clarence Gideon appealed his case all the way to the Supreme Court. Reversing several previous decisions, the Court finally allowed that “assistance of counsel” was necessary, even for non-capital cases. Little known fact? Future Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas was eventually assigned to help argue for Gideon at the Supreme Court.

Jury Trial

Jon Katz writes on the all too common phenomenon of jurors caving into pressure from fellow jurors, especially in serious felony criminal trials.

Mark Bennett describes the five basic defenses to possession charges that should be considered at trial. Of course, when actually in jury trial, don’t forget Mark’s corollary to Occam’s Razor… “Bennett’s Chainsaw” or why the second simplest explanation of the Government’s evidence is usually the best.

You can’t very well have the right to a jury trial, without imposing some sort of compulsory jury duty requirement on others. Kevin Underhill