Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

HCCLA 14th Annual Reading: Declaration of Independence

Leave a Comment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
Murray Newman, HCCLA President
(713) 864-2080 or murray@murraynewman.com

14th ANNUAL READING OF THE
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Houston, Texas – June 27, 2023 – In celebration of Independence Day, the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) is holding the 14th Annual Reading of the Declaration of Independence on Friday, June 30 at 9:30 am outside of the Criminal Justice Center, 1201 Franklin, Houston, Texas.

HCCLA President Murray Newman said, “although the Declaration of Independence isn’t a perfect document, it was our country’s first valiant effort towards forming a more perfect Union and it is one that we recognize by reading in this tradition as we continue to strive to be closer to perfection in our criminal Justice system.”

The Reading of the Declaration of Independence by criminal defense lawyers is an annual tradition started by past president Robert Fickman in 2010. “Our reading is a message to those abusive judges who persistently ignore or trample on the Constitution. Our message is this: the defense bar will continue to stand United against them until they stop their abuse of the Constitution,” said Fickman.

Members of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (TCDLA) will also be holding readings in front of courtrooms across the state. From their website: “The Declaration of Independence is our nation’s most revered symbol of a nation’s stand against the illegal and immoral depredations of the crown against our citizens. It is only fitting that in Texas, which leads the country in the exoneration of those wrongfully accused and imprisoned, criminal defense attorneys serve at the forefront of the battle against the encroachment on our rights today. These readings are a reminder to all in the criminal justice system that abuses of power will be exposed and fought by members of the criminal defense bar.”

The Declaration of Independence is the founding document of the United States, and contains within its text the fundamental truths and unalienable rights that typify and embody the American way of life: …that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Please join us in honoring our nation’s most sacred document in the spirit of independence:

When:     Friday, June 30, 2023
Where:    Criminal Justice Center
1201 Franklin St, Houston, Texas
(outside in front of the courthouse)
Time:      9:30 AM

The Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association is the largest local criminal defense bar in the United States with more than 600 active members. 

For more information about the history of the readings and photos, visit:
Declaration of Independence Readings (hccla.org)

###

Reading of the Declaration of Independence

Leave a Comment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
Doug Murphy, HCCLA President
(713) 229-8333 or email

9th Annual Reading of the Declaration of Independence

Houston, Texas – June 29, 2018 – In celebration of Independence Day, the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) is holding its 9th Annual Reading of the Declaration of Independence on Tuesday, July 3 at 12:00 pm outside of the Criminal Justice Center, 1201 Franklin Street.

HCCLA President Doug Murphy said, “The Declaration of Independence signifies what truly makes America great. The Declaration is not full of empty promises, but these Declarations ultimately became guarantees of liberty, freedom, equality and justice for all.”

The Reading of the Declaration of Independence by criminal defense lawyers is an annual tradition started by past president Robert Fickman. He has also coordinated with the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (TCDLA) to hold more than 100 readings in front of courthouses across the state, including one in front of the Tornillo immigrant minor detention camp near El Paso, Texas.

“Our annual reading of the Declaration comes at a critical time in our nation’s history. Our reading is a reminder that as Americans we cherish liberty, and we reject tyranny in any form,” said Fickman.

The Declaration of Independence is the founding document of the United States, and contains within its text the fundamental truths and unalienable rights that typify and embody the American way of life: …that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Please join us in honoring our nation’s most sacred document in the spirit of independence:

 

The Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association is the largest local criminal defense bar in the United States with more than 700 active members.

For more information about the history of the readings and photos, visit here:

###

 

Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

3 Comments

Guest Blog by Millie Thompson, HCCLA member and Defender of the Constitution

The Constitution does not guarantee that only the guilty will be arrested. If it did, § 1983 would provide a cause of action for every defendant acquitted—indeed, for every suspect released.

Libertarian-bent people repeatedly ask me the following leading question, expecting me to confirm their conclusion: We have a Constitutional right to resist an illegal arrest, right?

Bloody_Sunday-Alabama_police_attackNo, you don’t. There was a common law right to resist, set forth in the Supreme Court case Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900). That right was destroyed by the courts during the backlash against the Civil Rights Movement.

The courts stripped citizens of the right to resist an unlawful arrest, explaining that people should seek redress in court and sue civilly for an unlawful seizure. Qualified Immunity, however, destroys your ability to sue for an unlawful arrest based on mistaken identity.

On the one hand, you can’t resist them. On the other, you have no right to complain later if they were merely mistaken about arresting you.

Compare 1 with 2:

1 – United States v. Danehy, 680 F.2d 1311 (11th Cir. 1982):

Speaking for the court in United States v. Johnson, 542 F.2d 230, 233 (5th Cir. 1976), Judge Morgan evaluated the current vitality 1316*1316 of the common law right to forcibly resist unlawful arrest. He concluded that old Fifth Circuit case law on the subject had been “sapped of its precedential value” by the persuasive authority of decisions from the other courts of appeals. Those decisions recognize that the common law right to resist an arrest that is not based upon probable cause, suited though it may have been to a past era, has no significant role to play in our own society where ready access to the courts is available to redress such police misconduct. See, e.g., United States v. Cunningham, 509 F.2d 961, 963 (D.C. Cir. 1975); United States v. Martinez, 465 F.2d 79, 82 (2d Cir. 1972); United States v. Simon, 409 F.2d 474, 477 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 829, 90 S.Ct. 79, 24 L.Ed.2d 79 (1969). Cf. United States v. Ferrone, 438 F.2d 381, 389-90 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 1008, 91 S.Ct. 2188, 29 L.Ed.2d 430 (1971) (no right to resist search pursuant to invalid search warrant). But see United States v. Moore, 483 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir. 1973) (dictum). Although there may be some residual role for the common law right where it appears that the arresting officer is engaged in a “frolic of his own,” see United States v. Martinez, 465 F.2d at 82, there was no such situation here.

2 – Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137 (1979):

Respondent’s innocence of the charge contained in the warrant, while relevant to a tort claim of false imprisonment in most if not all jurisdictions, is largely irrelevant to his claim of deprivation of liberty without due process of law.[4] The Constitution does not guarantee that only the guilty will be arrested. If it did, § 1983 would provide a cause of action for every defendant acquitted—indeed, for every suspect released. Nor are the manifold procedural protections afforded criminal defendants under the Bill of Rights “without limits.” Patterson v. New York, 432 U. S. 197, 208 (1977). “Due process does not require that every conceivable step be taken, at whatever cost, to eliminate the possibility of convicting an innocent person.” Ibid.

The Fourteenth Amendment does not protect against all deprivations of liberty. It protects only against deprivations of liberty accomplished “without due process of law.”

Experts will tell you that the fight-or-flight instinct kicks in whenever someone is in a high stress situation, like, for example, when a police officer puts you in a choke hold. You get tunnel vision. Your body shuts down the processes associated with digestion and rational thought, and your body ramps up the systems that will help you outrun the lion or fight the home invader.

At rest, you can process messages like “put your hands behind your back.” When you’re experiencing the fight-or-flight response, your brain isn’t working in a way that allows proper computation of that message.

The law on resisting arrest is illogical on two fronts: First, the whole reason courts have gotten rid of it – you can sue – is false. No, you can’t sue. Those officers have immunity from suit. Courts also point to the right to a speedy trial. That right is meaningless. There are people sitting in county jails everywhere who can’t make bail, were arrested a year, or even two years, or even three years ago, and still haven’t gone to trial. Second, it is not a cognitive rational decision to resist. It isn’t a choice. It is instinct.

We have a Constitutional right to resist arrest, right? Nope.

So the School Principal has Interrogated Your Child…

4 Comments

 

The wisdom of my friend and colleague, Larry McDougal, bears repeating:

A school principal is undisputedly an agent of the State of Texas. Yet the rules that apply to police officers interrogating your child do not apply to school principals. Even if the police officer detaiprincipalns your child and takes them to the principal, as long as the police officer leaves the room prior to the interrogation by the school principal, the rights granted to any person when interrogated by the police do not apply. In the Matter of V.P., 55 S.W.3d 25. This includes the right to an attorney and the right to remain silent. So even though the principal is an agent of the State, they are not law enforcement and the questioning by a school principal is not a custodial interrogation as it would have been had a police officer conducted the questioning of your child.

So now school administrators and police officers are trained to have the principal take all statements or confessions from the child to avoid the constitutional protections afforded all persons when questioned by law enforcement. They will question your child, without notice to you, and anything your child says can be used against them in court. It is a sad day when our schools and law enforcement work together with the intent to deny our children their rights provided to them by both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions along with the Texas Family Code.

No one wants to teach his or her children to lie. Yet parents are forced with the reality of teaching their children not to cooperate with school administrators and law enforcement.

Your children, once they reach the age of 10 in Texas, must know to never admit to anything that they may have done. They must learn to stand up to authority by demanding that their parents be present, that they want an attorney, and they want to remain silent. Children must learn to hold their ground despite being threatened by the principal (or even a teacher or counselor). It is the American school system that has forced parents into this position.

It was not this way 30 years ago. It does not take much to get a young child to admit to something that they did not do.

Overall, this is one of the saddest consequences of our “tough on crime” mentality. Recalling the practices of the past decades, I remember prosecutors teaching law enforcement to “request” interviews and “release” the child after the interview – even if he intended to arrest. The “release” was to show that the child was not “in custody” and therefore the special protections requiring a trip to a magistrate before a statement could be made would not be triggered. Now, we have gone even further to suggest that the school administrators should do the questioning so as not to trigger the constitutional protections afforded to all.

Of even greater concern is that teachers and school administrators are now being offered and taught the infamous Reid technique: a police interrogation technique focused on breaking down the subject and extracting a confession.

Yes, you heard that correctly. Teachers and school administrators are now being taught to extract confessions under a technique that has been charactered by psychologists and judges as coercive and liable to produce false confessions – especially when used on juveniles who are highly suggestible and more easily manipulated.

The Reid Technique taught in schools is composed of three steps:

  1. an investigative component, in which you gather evidence;
  2. a behavioral analysis, in which you interview a suspect to determine whether he or she is lying; and
  3. a nine-step interrogation, a nonviolent but psychologically rigorous process that is designed, according to Reid’s workbook, “to obtain an admission of guilt.”

Even though taught to educators and administrators, outside a law enforcement arena, the video segments to demonstrate behaviors and questioning involved serious crimes such as murder and rape. The materials given to educators refer to suspects or subjects – never students or kids.

Not surprisingly, one of the first things administrators will do is take away the student’s cell phone to prevent calls or texts to parents. Teaching educators to “dabble” in law enforcement is just as dangerous as teaching them to “dabble” in psychology or other sciences. When they get it wrong (not “if” but “when”), we will have false confessions taking children down the prison pipeline with little hope of stopping.

And, why? We already have entire law enforcement agencies created and ran by our school districts. Officers are already on campus or very near campus to respond. Seems one or the other simply isn’t necessary. Ah, but then again, if we relied on our law enforcement officers, we would have to respect the child’s constitutional and statutory rights. And, don’t even get me started on the whole “alternative school” mess…

My Client Says He is Innocent But He Wants to Plea

1 Comment

TexasBarToday_TopTen_Badge_Small

TOP10 March 18, 2016

My Client Says He is Innocent But He Wants to Take a Deal to Get Out of Jail, What Do I Do?
by JoAnne Musick, HCCLA President and lawyer lifeguard_Page_22

So, your client who maintains his innocence wants to “take a deal” in order to get out of jail. Can you allow your client to enter a plea of guilty, even though he maintains his innocence? Let’s start with the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.

Rule 1.01(b)(1): A lawyer shall not neglect a matter entrusted to him or frequently fail to carry out completely the obligations that the lawyer owes the client.

Rule 1.02: A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decisions in a criminal case, after consulting with the lawyer, as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive a jury trial, and whether the client will testify.

Rule 1.02 Comment 2: A lawyer shall disclose offers to settle (proposed plea bargain offers in criminal cases).

Rule 1.03: A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. A lawyer shall explain a matter to a client so that the client can make informed decisions about representation.

First, you have an obligation and a duty to your client. If the prosecutor has made an offer, you must relay that offer to your client. You must also explain the offer sufficiently for your client to determine whether or not to proceed to trial or accept a plea offer. It is imperative that you not only convey offers and discuss whether to proceed to trial but also consult with the client the consequences of each decision. The client must understand the trial process and its pros and cons along with the evidence that is likely to be admitted.

Secondly, you must remember that it is the client who decides what plea is to be entered. He may plead guilty or not guilty. That decision is his and his alone. You should advise him as to the consequences of his plea, but the decision to enter a plea rests solely with the informed client.

Outside the Rules, you must consider the plea itself. Remember, the client maintains his innocence, yet he wishes to enter a guilty plea and take advantage of a plea-bargain. While a judge does not have to accept any plea of guilty (thereby forcing a trial wherein the client could plead guilty to the jury), the judge can accept a plea even where the defendant asserts innocence.

The Supreme Court held in North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970) that there is no constitutional bar preventing a judge from accepting a plea where a defendant maintains his innocence while admitting that the prosecution has enough evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. Thus, his plea stands regardless of his stance that he is innocent. This is typically referred to as an “Alford plea.”

So to answer our original question, the answer is simply you can most likely allow your client to enter a plea of guilty (to a judge or jury) despite the fact he maintains his innocence. Once the client is fully informed, the decision of the plea to enter (guilty or not guilty) rests solely with the client.

HCCLA files Southlawn Amicus

Leave a Comment

HCCLA, together with TCDLA and the Harris County Public Defender’s Office, has filed its amicus (friend of the court) brief in the Southlawn Gang Injunction case.

The Harris County County Attorney and District Attorney have sought to banish members of the Southlawn community from entering the area under the theory that they are protecting this area from gang activity. In short, the County has identified many individuals whom they seek to explicitly and permanently ban  from entering, remaining, appearing, sitting, walking, driving, bicycling, or being physically present within the “Southlawn Safety Zone.” This zone is just over 2 square miles.

While we recognize the County’s attempt to curb criminal activity within a particular area, this approach is offensive to the Constitution and effectively expels the named defendants from ever entering the area – whether for school, church, or to visit family.

Banishment, while used in medieval times, has never been authorized under Texas law. Banishment is the greatest form of punishment and should not be used as a civil remedy.

The full text of our amicus can be viewed and downloaded here:

Download (PDF, 210KB)

 

Thanks to the lawyers involved in this litigation for bringing this issue to our attention. And special thanks to Nicolas Hughes for his work in researching and writing on this issue.

For more information on the civil injunction case, Drew Wiley provides an overview.

See also, Texas Lawyer coverage

MADD About Bias

Leave a Comment

Have you been in Harris County Criminal Court at Law #2 lately? If so, you may have noticed the long present and blatantly offensive M.A.D.D. plaque is now absent, thanks to a reprimand from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct following a complaint by HCCLA.

For years, Judge William “Bill” Harmon arrogantly and inappropriately displayed his Mother’s Against Drunk Driving award on the bench in County Court #2. Despite requests from HCCLA and lawyers that it be removed, especially during DWI trials, Judge Harmon persisted in its display. During at least one trial, the potential jurors seated in the gallery responded they could see and read the M.A.D.D. plaque; they knew the meaning of the acronym so prominently displayed on the plaque; they even found its display ironic and uncomfortable. The display represented exactly what judges are supposed to avoid – an appearance of bias or impropriety.

One of the most basic canons judges must follow is to remain impartial and avoid even an appearance of impropriety. This is why the display was offensive. This is why HCCLA was compelled to take action and file a formal complaint with the State Commission on Judicial Conduct when Judge Harmon refused to remove the display. The direct result of our complaint was a private reprimand against Judge Harmon for this behavior.

For a judge who routinely hears DWI cases to display a perceived alliance with M.A.D.D. is beyond an appearance of bias. It very plainly shows a bias or prejudice against those who come before the court. Imagine being charged with DWI and walking into court to see that Mothers Against Drunk Drivers has honored the judge for his assistance in their plight. Would you trust that judge to be fair in your case? No, you wouldn’t. Does that bias instill a public trust in the judicial office? Of course not.

This inappropriate display finally came to an end with a private reprimand from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. The Commission is a state agency created under the Texas Constitution responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct and for disciplining judges who run afoul of the judicial canons that govern their conduct.

Following a request for the plaques removal, several court opinions, and finally an HCCLA complaint to the Commission, Judge Harmon has finally removed the offending display. One would have thought the suggestion that perhaps Judge Harmon would “do the right thing” following a recusal hearing would have received his attention. One would have thought the remarks of Judge Sharp, First Court of Appeals, expressing that the sanctuary of a public courtroom should be free from special interests groups and agendas would have mattered. One would have thought a Court of Criminal Appeals opinion condemning this display would have caused Judge Harmon to take note. But alas, Judge Harmon continued his offensive display of perceived bias against alcohol related cases and defendants who came before him on a daily basis.

Even during the almost year of a pending judicial misconduct complaint, Judge Harmon maintained his display. Absurdly Judge Harmon even suggested to the Commission during its investigation that photographs of the display, made part of the complaint, were staged or altered.

Right around the first of the year, the plaque mysteriously abandoned its home on the bench. Come to find out, Judge Harmon seemed to be aware of an impending decision of reprimand coming from the Commission.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct took action on our complaint. The Commission issued a private reprimand against Judge Harmon. The Commission cited his display of the plaque as against his obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety and his bizarre comments regarding the motion to recuse him for failing to remove the plaque. In this side issue, the Commission noted Judge Harmon’s improper ruling on the face of the recusal motion. Harmon had written it was clear to the defendant that the judge was impartial based on her decision to elect judicial punishment in the event of a guilty verdict. However, the law does not allow the judge to make a response to a recusal; his duty is merely to refer the motion to be heard by a neutral magistrate.

All-in-all, despite requests and admonishments, Judge Harmon refused to remove the offensive display from the public courtroom. HCCLA saw no alternative but to file a formal complaint with the Commission. And, thankfully, the Commission took action and issued its reprimand.

Many thanks to Tyler Flood for challenging the issue and providing us with great documentation of the conduct. Thanks to Robert Fickman, Andrea Podlesney, and Mark Bennett for their fine work in drafting the grievance. Many folks came forward and provided the evidence and documentation to support the complaint. Thank you to all.

The body of the complaint and the letter from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct can be viewed and downloaded below.

The Houston Chronicle reported the private sanction on Saturday, February 27, 2016 on page B2.

Download (PDF, 9.77MB)

Download (PDF, 268KB)

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.

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)

Happy Constitution Day

Leave a Comment

Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
Celebrates Constitution Day

September 17th is Constitution Day, and this year HCCLA began a new tradition of celebrating our United States Constitution with a public reading of the Preamble and Amendments. HCCLA also provided commemorative pocket constitutions for attendees and passersby.

BR-28

This event is modeled after our celebration and reading of the Declaration of Independence with occurs each 4th of July and was started by Past President Robert Fickman.

Special thanks to member Grant Scheiner for the inspiration for this event and to Grant, Philip Gommels, Jennifer Gaut, and Gemayel Haynes for organizing this celebration.

12045710_10207685213629701_5875322875994634008_o

Thank you to the following lawyers for participating in the reading of the United States Constitution Preamble and Amendments:

JoAnne Musick – Preamble
Grant Scheiner* – 1st Amendment
Danny Easterling – 2nd Amendment
Dyan Owens – 3rd Amendment
Gemayel Haynes – 4th Amendment
Jen Gaut & Lydia Johnson – 5th Amendment
Phil Gommels – 6th Amendment
Andrew Wright – 7th Amendment
Robb Fickman– 8th Amendment
Lonnie Knowles – 9th Amendment
Patti Sedita – 10th Amendment
Alma Garcia – 11th Amendment
Cheryl Irvin, Ryan Marquez and Alan Macia – 12th     Amendment
Staci Biggars – 13th Amendment
Michael Wynne – 14th Amendment, §1
Justin Harris – 14th Amendment, §2
Wade Smith – 14th Amendment, §3
Roberto Quijano – 14th Amendment, §4 (TSU student)
Akeem Ayinde – 14th Amendment, §5 (TSU Student)

Shout out to the judges who took time to attend and celebrate with us:
Michael McSpadden, Mike Schneider, Brock Thomas, Brad Hart, and Renee Magee (who was out of town but asked her coordinator, Joey DeBruyen, to attend in her absence)

Photos of the event can be found here

Texas Lawyer coverage!

Upcoming Events

Contact Us

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