Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

“Open Carry” NOT “Papers Please”

Leave a Comment

Having been made aware of District Attorney Devon Anderson’s advisory opinion to law enforcement officers [below], it appears the debate is alive and well. Whether or not a police officer may stop a citizen engaged in open carry to check for a license is a very real question.Your-Papers-Please-300x175

First and foremost, nothing in the open carry statute authorizes an officer to detain a citizen to determine if they have a license. The ability of a law-abiding citizen to lawfully open carry a handgun does not forego the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

While Ms. Anderson is correct that an officer may approach any individual in a consensual encounter, citizens are generally free to decline the encounter and walk away. The Supreme Court has consistently held that a person’s refusal to cooperate with a police request during a consensual encounter cannot, by itself, provide the basis for a detention.[i]

Her position that anything short of voluntary compliance with the officer’s inquiry should be reasonable suspicion to believe the person is illegally possessing the gun is perhaps too broad. Anderson cites Chiarini v. State for the proposition that courts have routinely permitted law enforcement officers to approach and detain those individuals observed to be in possession of a handgun. Recognizing that Chiarini was decided prior to the open carry law, we note that observation of a handgun may no longer carry the same connotation of illegal conduct.

There are three types of police-citizen inter-actions: (1) consensual encounters that do not implicate the Fourth Amendment; (2) investigative detentions that are Fourth Amendment seizures of limited scope and duration that must be supported by a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) arrests, the most intrusive of Fourth Amendment seizures, that are reasonable only if supported by probable cause. Police officers are as free as any other citizen to approach citizens to ask for information or cooperation. Such consensual encounters may be uncomfortable for a citizen, but they are not Fourth Amendment seizures. However, investigative detentions go beyond the consensual encounter and impact the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens.

Ms. Anderson’s position that declining the officer’s inquiry should be reasonable suspicion to justify an investigative detention discounts the necessity for reasonable suspicion. If declining an officer’s inquiry amounts to reasonable suspicion, then a citizen could never resist an officer’s inquiry. Consistent with Supreme Court opinions, an officer may only detain (stop) someone when the officer has specific, articulable, and individualized facts to make it reasonable to suspect that the person may be committing a crime.

In any event, if an officer does detain a citizen solely for engaging in open carry, that detention must be brief and limited to determining whether or not the citizen has a license to carry.

HCCLA will encourage lawyers to challenge the validity of any detention that fails to comply with the long established constitutional requirements governing the seizure of citizens. Though an officer may engage in a consensual encounter with any person regardless of their choice to open carry, nothing in the statute divests an otherwise law-abiding citizen of his or her constitutional rights. Generally, citizens may decline the consensual encounter and expect law enforcement to meet reasonable suspicion standards prior to their detention.

Much like a drivers license is required to legally operate a motor vehicle on our Texas roadways, a license is required to carry a handgun both openly and concealed. Law enforcement does not stop every vehicle operator to present his or her license. Why would they stop every open carry citizen?

Instead, it sounds as though Devon Anderson doesn’t support the Republican platform for open carry. While the Governor preaches liberty, Ms. Anderson wants to usher in an era of “papers please.” This is not what one expects in a free society. Ms. Anderson must accept that elections have consequences and the peoples elected legislature has spoken and approved open carry throughout Texas and Harris County.

____________________

[i] Wade v. State, 422 S.W.3d 661, 664-665 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013), citing Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 437, 111 S. Ct. 2382, 115 L. Ed. 2d 389 (1991) (“[A] refusal to cooperate, without more, does not furnish the minimal level of objective justification needed for a detention or seizure.”); Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 498, 103 S. Ct. 1319, 75 L. Ed. 2d 229 (1983) (plurality op.) (a suspect’s refusal to listen or answer a police officer’s questions in a non-seizure circumstance “does not, without more, furnish” the officers with reasonable suspicion for a seizure.).

 

View and Download Devon Anderson’s Advisory Opinion Here

Download (PDF, 941KB)

Camp Gladiator FREEBIE

1 Comment

Through our partnership with Camp Gladiator, here is your chance to receive a free 4 week camp beginning in January!Slide1

It’s time to work off the holidays and sharpen your mind and body through exercise – and for FREE! Try it out and let your trainer know you are with HCCLA – if you decide you like it, you will qualify for discounts on continued camps under our partnership.

If you have any questions, call or email our trainer
Jessica Leonard
jessicaleonard@campgladiator.com
(281) 736-4232

Denying refugees denies the idea of America

Leave a Comment

Denying refugees denies the idea of America

New group of political ‘Know Nothings’ is too willing to give in to fear

By Patrick F. McCann     As published December 22, 2015-Houston Chronicle

In the 1840s and 1850s, Irish and German Catholic immigrants, fleeing war, oppression, and famine, came in waves to the United States. In response to this, many white Protestant males formed the American Native party, later the “American” party. They carried on their society’s activities in semi-secret; if asked, they said they did not know anything about such a party or its activities. Hence, their popular nickname: the “Know Nothings.” I know this because one of the nation’s first race riots took place when a group of “Know Nothings” tried to burn down the Irish Catholic church in Lowell, Mass., where I grew up. Today, faced with millions of displaced people and refugees resulting from our own overturn of all the tables in the Middle East in the last decade, we are once again seeing the growth of fear and nativist sentiment to block any and all doors to taking in these sorry fruits of our own policies. How little times have changed.

More than half of the governors of this nation, Texas’ Greg Abbott among them, have now decided they get to set their own immigration policies and have announced they will “refuse” refugees from Syria if they are resettled here. That is a shame. You would think in the state that took in Jim Bowie, a known real estate speculator and duelist, there would be a little tolerance for women and children looking to not be the next casualty of ISIL. But hey, what do I know? I just live here. I just figure that since these people are trying to leave the very folks we are fighting, then it makes a certain sense we should welcome them here, in the same way Texas has normally tried to welcome strangers, and in the same way Scripture and history tell us to do.

It is a shame because the very thing that breeds resentment and seething anger in young people is being forced to see their families live in grinding misery in refugee camps. I know this because I saw it when I served in Bosnia after that ugly civil war. I cannot think of a better recruiting ground for ISIL than the camps holding millions of people who are right now sitting in Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. Their dreams of getting to either Europe or the United States are on hold because of the wave of fear that events like the Paris attacks and our most recent mass shooting in the United States produced. I might add that those Muslim countries in and around ISIL’s stronghold are at war with that group as well, and right now are bearing the burden to a far greater degree than we are in this country.

Fear does not require rational sense, nor does it produce rational responses. Fear is the victory of groups like ISIL. Fear is their food; it is their drink. Fear is what they want most of all, because fear makes a relatively small group of people like al-Qaeda or ISIL seem much stronger than they truly are.

Fear lets a few rule many, and fear is exactly what much of our so-called political leadership is giving these groups in the hopes of looking “strong” in the face of terrorism. By denying succor and refuge to those least able to fight back against the ISILs of the world, we deny ourselves and we deny what we as Americans are supposed to be to this world. We are either a beacon of hope and freedom, or we are not. We are either a nation that embraces the widows and orphans of the world or we are moral cowards, making a bogeyman out of a group of fanatics that will never topple us.

We Americans have hunted down and captured or killed thousands of al-Qaeda, including the man who founded them. ISIL is not unique, and though we may have to take some blame for helping create them by ill-advised actions in Iraq, we will isolate, contain and eventually beat them as long as we can show the world that they should not fear these mad pursuers of a fantasy caliphate that no one wants.

This is a group whose greatest military “accomplishments” have been executing aid workers who wanted to help feed the people ISIL oppresses. It is a group whose leaders boast about being able to kill innocent people who wanted to dine and dance in Paris. They will fall beneath our bombs and tanks and soldiers just like everyone else. They will only gain strength if the new “Know Nothings” in our political world use fear to keep us from doing what we should do as a people – morally, legally and historically. We are battling an idea in this struggle, and the power of the idea of America can only stay strong if we ourselves still believe in it.

These new “Know Nothings” who would exclude refugees from our common enemy are not our friends or protectors; they are the duped, unwitting allies of those who would strike fear into our hearts. They do not represent us as a people, and we should not let them speak for us. America is the world’s best hope. Let us live up to that, and not down to the frightened wailing of our modern “Know Nothings.”

Pat McCann is a local attorney and HCCLA past-president.

The Writ of St. Nick

Leave a Comment

‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house
Not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse.super santa
The cops were out beating inmates with care,
In hopes that No Bills soon would be there.

The snitches were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of 5Ks danced in their heads.
The DA in her ‘kerchief, and judges on board,
Harris County settled for bonds indigents can’t afford.

When in the courtroom there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from my seat to defend the matter.
Away to the bench I flew like a flash,
Tore open my law books and filed motions in a dash.

The law on my side and justice not found
I plead for release as my client was jail bound.
When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature sleigh, and eight tiny reindeer.

With a little old driver, so lively and quick,
I knew in a moment it must be St. Nick.
More rapid than eagles his words were finally heard,
And he whistled, and shouted, and freed the jailbird.

He brought in a Writ, and went straight to his work,
And brought justice for all, then turned with a jerk.
And knowing this was a rare show of compassion
This little ole miracle was all he could fashion.

He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like the down of a thistle.
But I heard him exclaim, ‘ere he drove out of sight,
“Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good fight!”

(thanks to Robert Fickman for the inspiration)

Rudolph (and gifts to judges)

Leave a Comment

Rudolph
By: Robert Pelton (HCCLA Past President)

rudolph

Rudolph by Annslee Pelton (granddaughter to Robert Pelton)

All of you have heard the song, “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” and are familiar with its main character Rudolph. Rudolph was created in 1939 by Robert May, an employee of Montgomery Ward. Although sources vary as to whether May created the story of Rudolph to promote sales at the Christmas season or to give as a gift to his young daughter to bring her comfort, May was doing his best to keep his job and comfort his child because Ms. May was dying of cancer.

May was picked on and bullied as a child, and the story of Rudolph was based on those personal experiences. Rudolph was Santa’s 9th reindeer who was mocked by the other reindeers because of his shiny red nose. Like May, Rudolph was mocked and bullied, but in the end, Rudolph became the hero when he was chosen to lead Santa’s sleigh on a foggy Christmas Eve.

Johnny Marks, Robert May’s brother-in-law, actually wrote the song “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.” My friend Carol Erickson remembers Johnny Marks, who served as a Captain in the Army during World War II. Carol’s dad served in the same unit as Johnny. After the war, Carol remembered Johnny coming to her house wearing a red suit and driving a new red Cadillac. Johnny tried to pitch the song to many popular singers such as Dinah Shore, Perry Como, Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra, but none were interested. At the urging of his wife, my hero and family friend Gene Autry recorded the song in 1949. It was an immediate hit and became one of the top songs in music history selling millions of copies.

“Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” has become a piece of modern folklore and a metaphor for overcoming obstacles, embracing the difference and recognizing everyone’s unique potential. As you review the lives of your clients in an ethical manner, you may find a little or a lot of Rudolph in them. Your client may have come from a broken and dysfunctional home, or have learning disabilities or mental issues. It is important to get your client’s full life history. The recommendation is that you go back three generations in your client’s life. No matter how bad and bleak the case looks, there may, and probably will, be some social redeeming qualities.

It is our job to zealously defend our clients in an ethical manner. If your client is a veteran, get all of his records whether good or bad. Also get a copy of the school and medical records. Do not forget to have your client stop all social media, especially Facebook. Serious prosecutors will be checking to see what a defendant has posted. If your client is in jail, warn him to be aware letters can be read and may be used against him and to beware of phone calls from jail. Be mindful of conversations in the hallways at the courthouse. It has happened that bystanders including law enforcement have testified about what they heard.

Once your investigation is complete, you may find your “Rudolph” has a history that will help him guide the sleigh to a positive outcome, or produce mitigation of the punishment. Even the worst among us has done something right in life. The research done on the ancestors of your client may help explain and or excuse his behavior. As my psychiatrist friend Geoff Grubb believes – only a very small percentage of humans are “Born to be Wild.” The remaining commit crimes because of many factors: poverty, inferiority complex, peer pressure, opportunity, desperation, drugs, depression, mental disorders, overpopulation, politics, racism, TV violence, and regionalism.

Like Rudolph, your client’s life may be changed forever if given the chance. If your “Rudolph” has alcohol or drug problems, enroll them in AA or NA. Encourage them to get a job, go to school and church, and any other positive thing that will help get them back on the right track.

Always remember: Santa Claus and the Grievance Committee are watching you.

 

ACCEPTANCE OF HOLIDAY GIFTS BY JUDGE AND STAFF

Opinion No. 194 (1996)

QUESTION: Is it a violation of Canon 4(d)(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct for a judge, court coordinator, court reporter (and clerks and bailiffs) to:

  1. accept holiday or seasonal gifts (assuming such to be commensurate with the occasion); or
  2. attend holiday or seasonal law firm parties?

ANSWER 1: Yes. A judge may only accept a gift from a friend for a special occasion and then only if the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasion and the relationship. Canon 4D(4)(b). A Judge may accept any other gift only if the donor is not a party or person whose interests have come or are likely to come before the judge. Canon 4D(4)(c). Opinion No. 44.

Texas Judicial Ethics Opinions Page 115 of 170

The Committee concludes that a holiday or seasonal gift from a lawyer or law firm where a lawyer is not a friend is prohibited. Where a friendship exists, the gift must be commensurate with the occasion and the judge must be mindful of Canon 2A and should act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. A judge should not convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. Canon 2B. Opinion No. 39.

ANSWER 2: No. A judge may attend holiday or seasonal law firm parties if the party is open to people other than judges and court personnel. Rule 4D(4)(b) and Opinion No. 39 permits a judge to accept ordinary social hospitality. The judge should act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary and should not convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. Canon 2(A) and (B).

The answers above apply equally to the judge’s staff, court officials and others subject to the judge’s direction and control. Canon 3C(2) provides a judge should require staff, court officials and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge. See Canon 3B(2) Code of Judicial Conduct, September 1, 1974, through December 31, 1993, and Opinions 110, 112 and 140 applying Code to court personnel.

 

Here is the main code provision that would apply to gifts:

Canon 4D:

(4)     Neither a judge nor a family member residing in the judge’s household shall accept a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except as follows:

(a)     a judge may accept a gift incident to a public testimonial to the judge; books and other resource materials supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the judge and spouse to attend a bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;

(b)     a judge or a family member residing in the judge’s household may accept ordinary social hospitality; a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from a relative; a gift from a friend for a special occasion such as a wedding, engagement, anniversary, or birthday, if the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasion and the relationship; a loan from a lending institution in its regular course of business on the same terms generally available to persons who are not judges; or a scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same terms applied to other applicants;

(c)     a judge or a family member residing in the judge’s household may accept any other gift, bequest, favor, or loan only if the donor is not a party or person whose interests have come or are likely to come before the judge;

(d)     a gift, award or benefit incident to the business, profession or other separate activity of a spouse or other family member residing in the judge’s household, including gifts, awards and benefits for the use of both the spouse or other family member and the judge (as spouse or family member), provided the gift, award or benefit could not reasonably be perceived as intended to influence the judge in the performance of judicial duties.

 

Ancillary to that would be the requirement to report certain gifts (depending on the value) in annual personal financial statements. That reporting requirement is for those officeholders who file reports with the Texas Ethics Commission or with the local county clerk per the Election Code. It is also generally covered under Canon 4I:

  1. Compensation, Reimbursement and Reporting.

(1)     Compensation and Reimbursement. A judge may receive compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the extra-judicial activities permitted by this Code, if the source of such payments does not give the appearance of influencing the judge’s performance of judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety.

(a)     Compensation shall not exceed a reasonable amount nor shall it exceed what a person who is not a judge would receive for the same activity.

(b)     Expense reimbursement shall be limited to the actual cost of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge and, where appropriate to the occasion, by the judge’s family. Any payment in excess of such an amount is compensation.

(2)     Public Reports. A judge shall file financial and other reports as required by law.

Finally, as you know, some gifts are illegal and could result in criminal charges under Chapter 36 of the Penal Code.

 

Robert Pelton is an HCCLA past-president and remains active in both HCCLA and TCDLA, as such, this articles is also reprinted in TCDLA’s online Voice for the Defense

Kent Schaffer: a profile

Leave a Comment

Kent Schaffer was a drama college major at the University of Texas when he saw Richard “Racehorse” Haynes cross-examine a Texas Ranger. For the next four days, Schaffer would skip his classes to attend the trial.   At the end of the trial, Haynes offered Schaffer a job. Schaffer showed up at the job the day after classes ended and for the next three summers he would continue working as an investigator for Haynes until he decided to be a lawyer. He graduated from the University of Houston Law School in 1981.

i-kentSchaffer has represented high profile clients such as Farrah Fawcett, Congressman Craig Washington, and R. Allen Stanford. He’s most recently been in the Tom Sizemore short film “Pieces” and was one of the producers of An Unreal Dream: The Michael Morton Story.

Q: It seemed like you enjoyed being an investigator for Haynes. Why law school?

A:    I was always in and out of trouble as kid. I’d often get in trouble for saying things that were on my mind. So it was always one of those ‘it takes one to know one…’ I always enjoyed trying to find out something about someone that they didn’t want me to find out.

 

Q: Did being a drama major in school help you with being a lawyer?

A: Being in trial is similar to a dramatic production. You have to get their attention and interest and you have to learn to make things interesting to someone. In drama you learn the tools to make people want to listen and pay attention. I don’t get stage fright. I enjoy the performance.

 

Q: How has going to trial changed from when you were first practicing?
A: Now, it’s a lot harder to take cases to trial. There’s not than many cases that get to trial. The federal sentencing guidelines are insanely high. When I first practiced, there was no talking to the police. Now a lot of people are snitches. A lot of people want to cooperate to get that probation or year instead of going to trial. The [State] threatens to hammer you if you go to trial so there aren’t a lot of lawyers willing to go to trial.

 

Q: How have you seen the jury system change over the years?

A: Now it’s an ADD generation. You can’t be too emotional and jurors have more mistrust of the lawyers. Jurors are more skeptical and conservative. They know the police lie, they know there’s an inherent racism in the system. They’ve seen CSI and in a case where there’s an absence of forensics, it can seem as though there’s no evidence. Lawyers need to be cognizant of their audience and pick members [of the jury] that are closer to the defendant. You have to adapt to a jury and I have to frame a case to that audience.

 

Q: How are judges different now than when you first started?

A: It seems a lot of people are in a hurry. You have to take the time to get your story out there; you can’t speed up the trial for the sake of brevity. Now we’re being told you have to speed things along. Judges compare the size of their docket as though that matters. Why does that make a quality judge? The quality of a judge is where justice is meted out and not how quickly they proceed through a case. Federal judges are different.

 

Q: What about the system itself. How has that changed?

A: There’s a lot of people who are in the criminal justice system who should not be there. We criminalize things we should not. When I went to St. John’s, I would get five pops for talking in class. Then when I got home, my parents would spank me for getting in trouble in school. I got spanked so much that I thought it was an S&M movie. We need more accountability from the family. In Aspen, the Sheriff recommends milder forms of marijuana. The deputies will protect the marijuana growers. The police there protect people unlike here where they’re kicking in the door to get a bag of weed. We will be the one of the last states to legalize marijuana. The electorate is not an intelligent group because we have a lot of people from West and East Texas.

 

Q: Is there a lawyer who you admire?

A: Gerry Goldstein. He enjoys life everyday. A lot of lawyers’ lives revolve around work. I don’t have a lot of passions but I enjoy photography, art, film, travel, and people. I’m not a good loner. Being a good lawyer is knowing people. You need a real appreciation for people.

 

Q: What advice do you have for the younger lawyers out there?

A: Always keep your word even though you don’t want to. People come to you and trust you. You made them that promise that you will give them a hundred percent of your time and talent. We’re like surgeons. People are on the table. You take the shortcut: that’s inexcusable because you want to go play golf. You can’t have it all. It’s hard to be all things to all people. When you have a profession instead of a job, you have to put in the time and keep your word. No shortcuts.

 

Q: You’ll be 60 years old on August 22. What would you be doing if you weren’t a lawyer?

A: I’m a Jew; we’ve always wandered the desert. If I’m not practicing law, I’d want to own the Bellagio.

 

interview by Thuy Le

Mentoring in Criminal Defense

Leave a Comment

Law school does not prepare lawyers for the courtroom generally. It teaches them to think, to analyze, and to process, but it does not generally teach the techniques necessary to the courtroom.

In criminal defense, most lawyers are solo practitioners. Many hang their shingle and start accepting cases immediately out of law school. Others may start in a prosecutor’s office but still do not understand the nuances of “defense” work or running a practice. In this vein, mentoring is vitally important.

HCCLA has led the forefront for mentoring in Texas. We have the largest and most successful second-chair program. We have worked with the public defender to further mentoring by assisting in the FACT program (future appointed counsel training). The goal has been to train lawyers in both private practice and indigent defense. By increasing the quality of defense lawyers, the entire system works stronger and better.

HCCLA’s second-chair program has been in existence for many years and is quite successful, thanks to the efforts of Sarah Wood (our coordinator) and all of those who regularly participate in the program.

You can read and download the entire report here:

Download (PDF, 929KB)

Will the Harris County District Attorney Ever Accept Responsibility?

2 Comments

 

“We respectfully disagree with the judge’s findings,” said Jeff McShan. “We believe our prosecutors acted ethically and argued within the four corners of the record and we intend to appeal.”

Nothing new here. This District Attorney, this District Attorney’s Office, has yet to take responsibility for any egregious behavior by its prosecutors.

This time, Judge Stacey Bond found in her 7 page findings that prosecutors Tiffany Johnson and Angela Weltin committed several misdeeds during trial, forcing a mistrial. During a hearing following the mistrial, it has been said that prosecutor Allan Curry argued that all though Ms. Johnson had acted inappropriately it was not intentional. Now, Jeff McShan, spokesperson for the District Attorney’s Office, says the prosecutors acted ethically. Which is it?

Previously, when a chief prosecutor was found to be texting the bailiff in charge of the jury during trial seeking information about the jurors thoughts, the District Attorney’s Office responded,

“While no violation was to be found, we don’t condone prosecutors texting bailiffs while a trial is taking place,” the spokesman said. “The matter will be handled internally.”

And, of course, there’s the famed David Temple case in which former prosecutor Kelly Siegler has been found to have violated ethical duties, and the District Attorney’s Office saw no problem.

And what about responsibility for their social media? While it may not have directly affected the trial at hand, the District Attorney posted on Facebook and Twitter during trial about extraneous charges that had not been introduced into evidence. Clearly, a violation of the ethical duties of any attorney and especially prosecutors. Yet, prosecutors again see no problem with their own actions.

What will it take for this District Attorney to start taking responsibility? When will we demand accountability? When will we demand the utmost in professional ethics of our prosecutors?

We’ve asked on several occasions (here and here), but alas it hasn’t happened.

UPDATE: Being a Prosecutor Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry – on the Fault Lines Blog by Murray Newman explains the ruling in more detail.

Tyrone Moncriffe: a profile

Leave a Comment

Moncriffe_TyroneTyrone Moncriffe was on the path to be a Worthing high school football star when a leg injury prevented him from finishing the season. Without football, Moncriffe was unsure about what he wanted to do with his life. When he was a sophomore at Texas Southern University, Moncriffe’s cousin was arrested. Going to court with his cousin got him interested in a career in law that would make him be known as a “story-teller” among his peers. It is his ability to tell the stories of his clients, many of whom have faced capital offenses, that makes him one of the most effective defense attorneys in Harris County.

Last year, Moncriffe was able to fulfill one of his lifelong dreams by lecturing to a group of Harvard Law School students. Earlier last month, Moncriffe defended a young man convicted of killing a Bellaire police officer.

 

Q: How did you end up going into law?

A: I was a sophomore in college and I get a phone call from my mother that my cousin had been arrested. We all went to the courthouse to support him and I see the defense attorneys talking to the prosecutors. I told my grandfather that night that I wanted to be a lawyer but didn’t know if I was eloquent enough or smart enough to go to law school. My grandfather told me to “never let your limitations hold you back.” He told me to seek someone that I admired and asked them how they got to where they are.

 

Q: Who did you contact?

A: One night, I’m watching tv and I heard the “golden voice” of Barbara Jordan. I called Jordan’s office to ask to speak to her. I wanted to ask her how I could be a better speaker and more eloquent. I wasn’t able to reach her that day so every day for the next two or three weeks I call her office trying to reach her. Her staff had to ask me to stop calling and that Ms. Jordan would call me back. A few weeks later, the phone rings at my mother’s house. On the other line is the “golden voice” of Barbara Jordan.

 

Q: What advice did Barbara Jordan give you?

A: Barbara Jordan told me to dream big. She told me to imagine I was a lawyer at Harvard talking to all these people. She told me that lawyers are the movers and shakers of the world and that they represent the Constitution. If I wanted to be a lawyer, I had to be the best.

At the end of the conversation, I asked if she would send me a letter so that my friends and family would believe me when I told them I spoke to Barbara Jordan. She sent me a letter a week later that is framed and hung on the wall near the entrance to my office.

 

Q: What would young Tyrone Moncriffe tell the first year lawyer Tyrone Moncriffe?

A: “It’s not all about you.” When I was young, everything was the Tyrone show.   I wasn’t able to connect to the jurors. As I became mature, I allowed the client’s story to connect with the jurors. I was too busy being a lawyer instead of a human being.

 

Q: How has that helped you with your cases?

A: Trials are about telling your client’s story. It’s a story within a story. There’s the story the prosecutor wants to tell the jurors and then there’s the client’s story. Lawyers have to be trained to understand that jurors are a combination of the logical and emotional. You have to acknowledge them, let them know you see them. Then they will want to help you. Jurors make decisions based on stories: who they should help, who are the good guys, who are the bad guys, what are the themes, what are the stories in this case. We have to help them see the humanity in the client.

 

Q: What advice would you give young and new lawyers starting out?

A: Robert Jones told me when I first started to take an acting class.   I took an acting class in 1984 and it transformed my ability to communicate with people. I was able to learn to respond to something the audience was doing. I learned to read a frown or a headshake and learned how to respond. I learned to say something and then wait for a response.

Also, all lawyers should go to the trial college training. I went to the training in 2000 in Wyoming and learned how to take off my mask. As lawyers, we have masks. We put them on and we take them off. We become “authentic” when we take off the masks. You become strong because you’re authentic.

We forget when we’re talking to jurors to look into their eyes because we’re too busy being a lawyer. I one time saw a juror tell a lawyer that his father had died. Instead of responding to the juror, the lawyer moved on and did not respond to the juror. That lawyer failed to see that juror as a human being. Jurors see things and know things. They want to connect with the human spirit. You have to try to get the jury to see the good in your client.

Finally, watch as many trials as you can. Ask a lawyer if you can sit with them when they’re in trial. Go to trial. You have to let the prosecutors know that you’re willing to go to trial or they won’t be afraid of you or respect you as a lawyer.

 

Q: How have you noticed the practice of law change from when you first started out?

A: Back when I first started out, the judges, the prosecutors, and state all talked. They tried to resolve things. Now, there’s not that much talking between the parties going on. There are many that come into the district attorney’s office with no life experience. The defense lawyers are different, too. Now, the lawyers want to make a lot of money and drive a certain car. Back then, the defense lawyers tried to challenge the fourth amendment. We had a zeal back then. Now it seems like there’s this attitude that we can’t fight them (the State). Let’s move our cases as quick as possible to make money.   There’s a trend of lawyers going after money instead of honing their craft.

 

Interview with Tyrone Moncriffe as told to Thuy Le. Thuy Le is a former Galveston and Harris County prosecutor. She has been licensed since November 2007 and is a graduate of Syracuse University College of Law.

HCCLA Toy Drive

1 Comment

hccla toy-driveThis year’s HCCLA Toy Drive, organized by Brandon Ball, benefits Star of Hope.

We are accepting UNWRAPPED toys and cash donations through December 12, 2015.

Please bring toys appropriate for boys and girls of all ages, infant through 15 years. Care packages of new/unused personal items are also appropriate and appreciated.

Drop-off locations include:

Harris County Public Defender Office, 1201 Franklin, 13th floor (Criminal Justice Center)
Schneider & McKinney, 440 Louisiana, Ste. 800 (Lyric Center)
Mark Thiessen, 1221 Studewood, Houston, TX 77008
Adams & Ball, 7930 Broadway Street, Ste. 106, Pearland, TX 77581
and our Annual Holiday Party (December 10, midtown)

Many thanks to Brandon Ball for organizing this drive to help those in need. 100% of donations will be delivered directly to Star of Hope in time for their holiday events!

 

 

Upcoming Events

Contact Us

Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
P.O. Box 924523
Houston, TX 77292-4523
(713) 227-2404