Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

  • Home
    • COVID-19 Court Updates
    • Local Court Information
    • Criminal Law Jobs
  • Membership
    • HCCLA Membership
    • Mentorships
  • About HCCLA
    • Officers & Directors
    • Member Directory
    • Mentorships
    • In Memoriam
    • Bylaws
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • The Defender
    • Reasonable Doubt 2021
  • Events & Seminars
    • Event Calendar
    • Holiday Party 2024
    • Declaration of Independence Readings
    • HCCLA Annual Banquet & Awards
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Member Login

Will the Harris County District Attorney Accept Responsibility?

July 18, 2015 3 Comments

Our clients have problems.

Despite their denial, the Harris County District Attorney has problems as well.

They want our clients to accept responsibility. Will they as well?

In yet another instance, injustice and an appearance of impropriety permeates the Office of District Attorney for Harris County. Apparently, it seems the prosecutor and the bailiff engaged in a series of conversations and text messages about the jury. The importance of this is two-fold: (1) the bailiff, a Harris County Deputy Sheriff, is an officer and arm of the court who is the only person authorized to speak with jurors and (2) the prosecutor is an officer of the court who is forbidden from talking to the jurors. Granted, the prosecutor did not engage in direct communications with the jurors; however, she did attempt to communicate through the bailiff.

She texted the bailiff saying she wished she knew what the jury was thinking. The bailiff responded saying he would find out. THAT IS INAPPROPRIATE. There is no way to spin this so that any part of that conversation was proper and within the rules that require the court (via his bailiff) and the parties (via the prosecutor) to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

So what’s the big deal? Well, the thing is this is just one of many instances – all seemingly small – which cast doubt on the ability to have a fair trial in Harris County.

When will Devon Anderson accept responsibility? She didn’t in her response to our request about Dan Rizzo and the Alfred Brown case. She didn’t in an inquiry about prosecutor’s Connie Spence and Craig Goodhart threatening witnesses. She hasn’t in her media responses to the Kelly Siegler findings of prosecutorial misconduct. And, she hasn’t here. What will it take?

 

Filed Under: appearance of impropriety, honor, justice, police, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: alfred dwayne brown, appearance of impropriety, bailiff, cell phone, criminal defense, Criminal Justice, Dan Rizzo, devon anderson, district attorney, fair trial, fundamental fairness, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, harris county sheriff, hccla, honor, Improper Conduct, justice, kelly siegler, lawyers, perception, prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutors

Prosecutorial Misconduct Must Be Addressed

July 14, 2015 1 Comment

Sadly, Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson has declined our request calling for an investigation into former prosecutor Dan Rizzo’s conduct in the Alfred Brown case.

She cites expired statutes of limitations (the time in which a criminal charge or grievance can be brought).

Download (PDF, 365KB)

Though the prosecutor has declined any follow-up, we remain vigilant in our investigation into what appears to be yet another instance of prosecutorial misconduct.

When a person takes steps to conceal their behavior, the statute is tolled, and it seems clear that Mr. Rizzo did just that: he concealed exculpatory evidence, he colluded with a cop to intimidate a witness and then falsely charge that witness in a criminal case, and he used the veil of grand jury secrecy to carry out his witness intimidation.

The State Bar has already established new rules for bringing grievances, even years later, where a prosecutor commits misconduct, and the time for filing the grievance now runs from the time of discovery. So much of this tragedy, while occurring years ago, has just recently been discovered.

This is such a blatant attempt to dodge responsibility that it should, along with her statement today regarding the pending decision about prosecutorial misconduct by Ms. Siegler,* result in the consideration of a possible court of inquiry as former prosecutor Ken Anderson faced in the wake of the Michael Morton tragedy. (*Devon Anderson was quoted as saying, “Any actions such as reopening an investigation into this case would be premature.”)

Filed Under: honor, incarceration, justice, police, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: alfred brown, court of inquiry, Dan Rizzo, devon anderson, former prosecutor, grand jury secrecy, grievance, harris county, kelly siegler, ken anderson, prosecutorial misconduct

Hollywood: Cold INjustice

July 11, 2015 Leave a Comment

Chronicle Editorial Hits Nail on the Head: Hollywood ending, A potentially innocent man sat behind bars so that a prosecutor could get on television.

“an awful lot of razzle dazzle for the serious business that goes down in criminal courtrooms”

Some prosecutors forget. Some never know it to begin with. But, criminal courtrooms are serious business. Life and liberty (for all) are at stake. Criminal courtrooms mean much more than their civil counterparts who fight over money.

It is interesting that most people do not care about the criminal justice justice system; most do not care if rights are trampled; most have no idea innocent people can be convicted; until it happens to them or a family member.

For over 21 years, Kelly Siegler (a Harris County Assistant District Attorney) played fast and loose with the rules. She used the courtroom as her stage for theatrics. Yes, she was aggressive, and that’s ok, as long as it is fair. Hiding evidence is not fair. Subpoenaing witnesses under a different case to hide the witness is not fair. Lying to the court is not fair. Interfering with public information requests is not fair. Continuing to hide evidence long after you no longer work as a prosecutor is not fair.

Just as there are bad influences in every profession, Kelly has marred the reputation of prosecutors, even those who do seek justice. It’s easy to be fair. A web of lies and deceit do nothing for our system of justice, except create injustice.

Filed Under: honor, jail, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust, Reasonable Doubt Tagged With: cold justice, criminal defense, devon anderson, dick deguerin, district attorney, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, hccla, honor, Improper Conduct, injustice, justice, kelly siegler, lawyers

McSpadden Battles Jail Overcrowding

July 9, 2015 1 Comment

Today, Senior District Court Judge Michael McSpadden shared his thoughts with Senator John Whitmire regarding jail overcrowding.

While we do not always agree on each issue, we applaud Judge McSpadden for his efforts in pushing for reduction in low-level drug offenses which would clearly have a major impact on our local jail overcrowding. Rather than shipping inmates out of county for holding, pending court (meaning they have not been convicted of anything), had the legislature reduced the “trace” cocaine cases to misdemeanor class C offenses, a substantial portion of those awaiting trial would be released so that courts, law enforcement, and prosecutors could focus on more serious offenses and more violent offenders. Additionally, barring a legislative change, elected District Attorney Devon Anderson could exercise her prosecutorial discretion to serve the same purpose.

Jail overcrowding is a problem. It must be fixed. Shipping inmates around the state for housing is not the answer.

Thanks to Judge McSpadden for at least attacking the problem and offering viable solutions. Read Judge McSpadden’s correspondence here:

 

Download (PDF, 80KB)

Filed Under: incarceration, jail, justice, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: devon anderson, district attorney, harris county, Harris County District Attorney, harris county sheriff, jail overcrowding, overcriminalization, pretrial detainees, ron hickman, senator john whitmire, trace cocaine cases

Egregious Prosecutorial Conduct

July 9, 2015 1 Comment

David Temple, the innocent man Kelly Siegler finally convicted, may finally get a new trial. In his 19-page findings of fact, Judge Gist notes at least 36 instances of prosecutorial misconduct; he paints a picture of a prosecutor willing to win at any cost and failing to follow her duty to disclose, or timely disclose, evidence favorable to the defense. Siegler, he notes, testified she didn’t need to turn over the evidence because she didn’t believe it was true.

The prosecutor’s personal belief in the truth of the favorable evidence can never be the benchmark for what prosecutors must disclose. Almost always, the Brady information which must be disclosed will be contrary to the prosecutor’s case or at least at issue with a portion of their case. But that’s exactly why it must be disclosed; defense attorneys are entitled to explore and investigate that information which may tend to exculpate their client. Defense attorneys are entitled to information which could harm the prosecutor’s case or cast doubt upon their witnesses. That’s been the law for decades. Certainly, if a prosecutor were to believe the information, her duty would be not only to disclose the information but also to dismiss the prosecution.

Read more from the Houston Chronicle: Judge Finds Fault with Legendary Local Prosecutor

HCCLA in the news criticizing ex-prosecutor Kelly Siegler’s conduct in the David Temple murder case (excerpts here):

Gist made his findings after a 10-week hearing that began in December, in which attorneys Stanley Schneider and Casie Gotro questioned prosecutors, investigators and defense attorneys about what happened throughout the murder trial. The two took over Temple’s appeal from DeGuerin.

“The evidence supports the findings,” Schneider said. “I feel relieved. The next step is getting David a new trial.”

Commenting on Siegler’s conduct outlined in the judicial findings, trial attorney dick DeGuerin is quoted:

“I think it’s bad, and I think she ought to be held accountable,” Dick DeGuerin said. “But I’m going to let someone else decide that.”

On behalf of HCCLA,

JoAnne Musick, president of the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association, said Gist’s findings show “egregious” conduct.

The organization of defense attorneys is reviewing transcripts of the hearing to determine if a grievance should be filed.

“Whether it’s Morton or Graves or whoever, we see prosecutors who want to win, so they don’t want to disclose everything,” Musick said. “If they’re hiding things or playing games, that’s not upholding their duty to do justice. That’s trying to win.”

One of Temple’s attorneys who spent days questioning Siegler blasted the former prosecutor:

“Charles Sebesta was just disbarred for this same kind of conduct,” said Casie Gotro. “Dick DeGuerin stood on the courthouse steps and told the world Kelly Siegler had finally convicted an innocent man. These findings reveal exactly how she did it.”

This is certainly one story that will continue as Judge Gists’ findings are forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals for review.

The Houston Press is following this story as well, read more (excerpts here):

Prosecutors “intentionally, deliberately, or negligently failed to disclose” investigators’ reports and witness statements that pointed to other suspects, but Siegler continued the suppression even following the conviction, according to the findings.

Siegler testified in the habeas hearing that potential exculpatory evidence didn’t need to be disclosed if prosecutors “did not believe it was true,” according to the findings.

Gist also wrote that Siegler influenced post-trial maneuvers by telling police and officials within the DA’s Office not to disclose public records if they were requested. The findings also state that Siegler continued to pull strings even after leaving the DA’s Office in 2008, after 21 years, by getting an alleged witness who approached DeGuerin after the trial to change his story.

In that situation, Daniel Glasscock gave DeGuerin a sworn statement that he overheard another man implicate himself in the murder. Glasscock passed a polygraph administered by the DA’s Office and also gave the same story to a DA’s investigator.

But Siegler “asked” a Harris County Sheriff’s deputy — who was involved with the trial investigation — to contact Glassock and another witness “before they could be contacted by the Special Prosecutor [in the habeas investigation] or current members of the District Attorney’s Office. The Deputy did so and afterwards, their stories were significantly different than the original version,” according to the finding.

“In substance, Glasscock repudiated the most important details to the extent that his future credibility as a witness is significantly impaired,” Gist wrote.

Houston attorney Paul Looney, who worked on Temple’s case before DeGuerin took over, told theHouston Press that Siegler’s ultimate goal was to use the case as leverage to get her own TV reality series — an idea she had unsuccessfully pitched once before.

Siegler then asked to take over the Temple case, which had been languishing for years because the original grand jury chose not to indict.

“This was her opportunity to enhance her resume to the point where she would get her TV show,” Looney said. “It worked, she got the show (“Cold Justice” on TNT). But boy, at what a price. At the price of David Temple’s life, at the price of an entire family’s reputation, and at the price of her own integrity.”

As for Siegler’s impression of exculpatory evidence, Looney said, “If Kelly’s bizarre interpretation of that rule were ever to be the law, then all a prosecutor would ever have to do to keep any witness statement away from the defense is say, ‘Well, I didn’t believe it, so I didn’t give it to the defense.’ That’s never been the law, it would totally eliminate law, but she just boldly stated it — and the only thing I can figure is she’s trying to find some arguable basis to try to defend her law license from the ultimate scrutiny of the State Bar of Texas, which undoubtedly is going to happen over this case.”

But Looney alleged that Siegler not only violated professional ethical standards, but that she committed a felony by obstructing justice.

“If Kelly Siegler’s a lawyer in five years, I’ll be shocked,” Looney said. “And if she’s not a felon in five years, it’ll be because [District Attorney] Devon Anderson decided to protect her own friend.”

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Lisa Falkenberg hits the nail on the head with her column: Judge is Right: Prosecutor Didn’t Live Up to Her Duty

The prosecutor’s duty is to seek justice, not win at all costs. Her “ego” wouldn’t let her lose this cold case. Cited twice now, once by the appellate court and now by the habeas judge, Kelly’s conduct is egregious and intentional as she hid evidence, failed to disclose evidence, and lied to the court about the evidence.

Filed Under: honor, justice, Members, politics, prosecutors, Public Trust Tagged With: casie gotro, criminal defense, dick deguerin, ethical violations, harris county, hccla, Improper Conduct, joanne musick, justice, kelly siegler, prosecutors, stanley schneider

PR: Declaration of Independence

July 1, 2015 Leave a Comment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
JoAnne Musick, HCCLA President
832-448-1148 office,  email JoAnne

6th ANNUAL READING OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
Houston, Texas – June 29, 2015

In celebration of Independence Day, the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) is holding its 6th annual reading of the Declaration of Independence. This year’s event will be led by JoAnne Musick, the association’s president.

HCCLA’s reading of the Declaration is an annual tradition that was started by HCCLA Past President, Robert Fickman. This year he organized similar readings across the state, making defense bar history. Readings by defense lawyers will take place in front of 127 Texas courthouses, covering one-half of all county seats. HCCLA continues to lead Texas with the largest gathering, boasting over 100 local attorneys, judges and Houstonians in attendance.

The Declaration of Independence is our nation’s most cherished symbol of liberty. This sacred document 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: Thursday, July 2, 2014
Where: Harris County Criminal Justice Center
1201 Franklin Street , Houston, Texas
(Front steps of the courthouse)
Time: 11:30 AM

The Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association is the largest local criminal defense bar in the United States with more than 750 active members. For more information about the history of the readings and photos, visit: http://www.criminaldefensedeclarationreading.com/
###

download here:

Download (PDF, 53KB)

 

Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association also issued their press release as this event has grown into a statewide event:

PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:  Joseph Martinez, Executive Director : TCDLA
TELEPHONE:  (512) 478-2514
PLEASE SEND ELECTRONIC TEARSHEET TO:  declarationreading@gmail.com

Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers to Lead Readings of Declaration of Independence in over 120 Texas Counties on July 2, 2015.

Members of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (TCDLA) are holding Annual Fourth of July readings of the Declaration of Independence at over 120 Texas County Courthouses on July 2, 2015. TCDLA is an organization committed to protecting individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. and Texas Constitutions in criminal cases. The readings were first organized in 2010 by Robert Fickman, a Houston criminal defense attorney, who leads the organization of readings today as well.

Sam Bassett, the President of TCDLA, states: “Criminal defense lawyers fight to protect the liberties of our fellow Americans on a daily basis in courts across Texas. As a group, we are proud to stand united and lead readings of the Declaration of Independence. It is a recognition that our Founders intended for individual liberty to be a paramount concern. As recent events have shown, power threatens these liberties. Prosecutors who illegally withhold evidence, courts that conduct plea mills, abusive police officers and appellate courts who gut the Fourth Amendment are examples of the ongoing struggle within the criminal justice system.”

The members of TCDLA stand united in defense of liberty.

To learn more about this event, please contact TCDLA President Sam Bassett at (512) 472-0144 or sbassett@mbfc.com or Robb Fickman at (713) 655-7400

Filed Under: honor, justice, Members, press release, Public Trust Tagged With: declaration of independence, harris county, joanne musick, press release, Robert Fickman

Time for Case Limits in Harris County?

June 14, 2015 Leave a Comment

In a recently discovered memorandum, a case is made for case limits in criminal cases, especially those handled in indigent cases by appointed lawyers.

House Bill (HB) 1318, passed by the 83rd Texas Legislature, instructed the Texas Indigent Defense Commission (TIDC) to “conduct and publish a study for the purpose of determining guidelines for establishing a maximum allowable caseload for a criminal defense attorney that…allows the attorney to give each indigent defendant the time and effort necessary to ensure effective representation.” That study is now complete and available on the TIDC website where it can be downloaded as well.

Both national and state organizations make clear that attorneys can effectively handle only so many cases a year. Yet, in Harris County, the claim is that a small percentage of attorneys handle an extraordinarily large caseload of appointed criminal cases while reporting that caseload is only 40-65% of their practice.

According to the memo, there is no evidence that the disproportionate appointment system is based upon merit. Few of the attorneys with highest appointed caseloads ever go to trial. Yet they are the highest paid appointed attorneys in the system. The number of cases appointed by lawyer, by type, or by court can be viewed on the TIDC website here:  http://tidc.tamu.edu/public.net/Reports/AttorneyCaseLoad.aspx.

The memo also explains a study undertaken to examine the work done by appointed counsel across the state which was then compared to work in Harris County. The study utilized 196 attorneys (private attorneys and public defenders) over a 12 week period. They logged their work and tasks into a computer program, resulting in a sample of the amount of time lawyers spend on their cases. Their numbers were sent to 319 attorneys to review and adjust based upon how much time they should spend on cases. Finally a panel of 18 senior criminal defense lawyers reviewed those results and again adjusted to reflect time that is generally required for cases. From those numbers, caseload standards were set based on the time available in the year and the time required for particular cases.

The results were that several Harris County indigent lawyers kept caseloads much greater than the Texas standard and the national standard. In short, the actual results in Harris County were the most egregious violations of the caseload maximums across the state. One attorney closed 969 cases (441 felonies and 528 misdemeanors) in one year! The highest caseload standard was 236 class B misdemeanors that could effectively be handled by one attorney in a one year period. This particular attorney (licensed approximately 7 years) threw in an extra 292 misdemeanors AND 441 felonies, which comprised only 65% of her total practice. That’s a huge caseload and tops the charts for Harris County. Another 23 attorneys top out at over 300 adult felonies per year. Of those 23, 6 had 400 or more and 2 had 553, which is apparently the cut-off for being paid. So 24 lawyers far exceed the caseload standards for indigent defense. Many others exceed the standards, though by not as great a margin.

The memo’s conclusion: The answer to improving private assigned counsel in Harris County is twofold: (1) establish reasonable caseload maximums, and (2) encourage a culture of investigating and researching cases.

The full memo can be viewed and downloaded here

Download (PDF, 54KB)

This is an issue that Robert Fickman, a local criminal defense lawyer and Past President of HCCLA, has flagged for years. Data in the past has been based on the amounts paid to local appointed lawyers. This data was limited due to the fact that it came from the auditor’s office without specific detail. Now, with TIDC collecting specific data and attorneys self-reporting their practice percentages, the data paints a broader picture of the injustice in attorneys handling too many cases. They simply do not have enough hours in the day (or year) to properly investigate and prepare defenses and challenge the state’s evidence with these extreme caseloads.  One of his recent blogposts on the topic can be found here http://blog.fickmanlaw.com/2015/06/harris-county-where-the-accused-are-treated-like-cattle/.

Filed Under: justice, politics, Public Trust Tagged With: appointed lawyers, caseload standards, harris county, indigent defense, texas indigent defense commission, TIDC

Alfred Brown Unresolved Matters

June 12, 2015 Leave a Comment

In a letter to Hon. Devon Anderson, Harris County District Attorney, HCCLA calls for action on unresolved matters related to the Alfred Brown prosecution.

As you may be aware, our District Attorney has announced the dismissal of charges against Alfred Brown as being unable to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. This dismissal comes after the discovery of exculpatory evidence (tending to corroborate Brown’s alibi), the exposure of improper grand jury badgering of Brown’s alibi witness (Ericka Dockery), and recanting witnesses.

In case you missed it, Lisa Falkenberg (Houston Chronicle) was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of this grand jury behavior. Her spotlight on this issue also led to grand jury reform in this year’s legislative session! (Read some more about grand jury reform and the District Attorney’s Office here)

We now call upon the Office of District Attorney to continue the inquiry into the conduct surrounding the initial investigation and prosecution of Alfred Brown and the prosecution of Ericka Dockery, specifically focusing upon potential criminal offenses and unethical conduct by Brown’s lead prosecutor, Dan Rizzo.

Our letter to Devon Anderson can be viewed and downloaded here:

Download (PDF, 2.56MB)

Filed Under: honor, incarceration, jail, justice, politics, press release, Public Trust Tagged With: alfred brown, criminal conduct, devon anderson, district attorney, ericka dockery, grand jury reform, harris county, lisa falkenberg, public inquiry, reform, restore public trust, unethical behavior

Police: The New Gang in Town

June 9, 2015 Leave a Comment

A recent Texas Monthly article, Police Violence — The More Things Stay the Same, parallels the 1977 Texas Monthly cover and its companion article to today’s police brutality, both in Texas and beyond.

Neww gang thumb

The 1977 cover and article depicted Houston Police as a biker gang, the new gang. On the heels of the Joe Campos Torres, Jr. murder, then Houston Mayor Fred Hofheinz, obviously anguished, said: “There is something loose in this city that is an illness.” His sentiments were echoed by famed criminal defense attorney Percy Foreman who called Houston a “police state.” Percy continued, “The Houston Police Department is worse, and its officers more violent and unchecked, than any comparable police force in the country.”

A little history as an aside: Torres, a 23-year old Vietnam Veteran, was arrested in May 1977 for disorderly conduct at an east-side Houston bar. The six responding officers took Torres to a place called “the hole” near Buffalo Bayou and severely beat him. When the officers presented Torres to the jail for booking, jail personnel ordered Torres taken to the hospital. Instead, the officers returned to the bayou and tossed Torres into the water with his hands still cuffed. Days later, Torres’ body was discovered in the water.

The two officers who were tried in state court on murder charges were convicted of negligent homicide and given one-year probation and a $1 fine. Later officers were tried in federal court and were convicted and served 9 months in prison.

The outrage over the officers’ action and their punishments led to riots and protests.

These 1970’s accounts of police violence parallel today’s accounts: a policeman in McKinney, Texas drawing his service weapon on a group of African-American teenagers in swimsuits; a Harris County prosecutor using a grand jury to browbeat an alibi witness; the officer shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; and the police shooting of mentally ill Kajieme Powell in St. Louis.

Of particular interest to us in Harris County, Percy Foreman blamed the 1970’s police violence on Harris County prosecutors who have “’white-washed every charge against policemen,’ thus encouraging even more police violence by letting police know that they are free from the sanctions of the law.” It’s telling that Percy’s take on violence then is echoed by Harris County defenders still today and the remarkable rate at which Harris County grand juries wash charges against policemen.

Anyway, the article is worth the read as it goes on to analyze the military-styled police state and their training, particularly that since 9/11 police have been trained to OCCUPY rather than PROTECT.

Filed Under: honor, justice, military, police Tagged With: alfred dwayne brown, dockery, grand jury, harris county, Improper Conduct, joe campos torres, percy foreman, police brutality, police violence, prosecutors, white-wash

Evaluating the State’s Offer

June 6, 2015 Leave a Comment

Evaluating the State’s Offer
By Nicole DeBorde

How do you know whether the State is making a “good” offer? You cannot know until you have done all the work necessary to properly evaluate the case. What you need to properly evaluate the case is almost always more than what is in the state’s file. While the state’s file is a very good starting point, it rarely should end the inquiry. Once you have reviewed the offense report, statements and all other materials in the file, you should discuss the items and reports with your client. Are there other witnesses you should send an investigator to interview? Do you need to subpoena dispatch records, MDT’s, blood records, CPS records, medical records, audio and video recordings, social media records, etc? Do you need an expert to evaluate some forensic conclusion?

When you are the person suffering the consequences, a low offer from the state on a case they cannot make is too high. Your client is depending on you to know whether the state can make the case from a legal standpoint. While your client may be willing to jump on a low offer, it may not be the right thing if the state’s case is weak or cannot be made. As a lawyer, you simply cannot know whether the offer is a good one unless you have done the work to evaluate the case. Remember that the state is assuming the information they have in the report is accurate and based on solid science. It is a terrible disservice to a client for a defense lawyer to assume the same.

Collateral consequences should also be given serious consideration. What type of sentence will trigger which collateral consequence? Does the client hold a license which could be jeopardized? What is the client’s immigration status? Does the client need to travel internationally? Does the client like to hunt or have firearms? What will happen to the client’s driver’s license? Can a deferred adjudication be sealed? What is the difference between sealing and expunction? Is a deferred really dismissed or will it remain on record for public view? (You know, but your client needs an explanation too.) Because I do parole work, one of the scariest things I hear in the courthouse halls is misinformation about when a defendant will “get parole.” Almost all the information I overhear being imparted to the accused considering a prison sentence in the halls or holdover is incorrect. The client is depending on you to know what the consequences of their guilty plea will be. If you do not know, do not guess. Call an expert in the area of concern, whether it be parole, immigration or any other collateral consequence.

Whether the state’s offer is a good one depends on many factors. Ultimately, the client will decide whether the state’s offer is a good one. Good attorneys should be able to clearly explain all of the risks, benefits and consequences associated with taking an offer and with rejecting it. Once you have explained all of the possibilities, the client can make an informed decision about how they wish to proceed.

Filed Under: Defender, practice pointers Tagged With: criminal law, harris county, justice, offer, plea, plea deal, plea or trial, pleading guilty

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

Helpful Links & Resources

  • Seminars & Events
    • Speakers Bureau: Request a Speaker
  • Court Info & Policies
  • Harris County Managed Assigned Counsel (MAC)
  • Guide to ePLEA
  • HCCLA Ethics Hotline 713.518.1738
Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA)

Important Links

  • Bylaws
  • HCCLA Membership
  • Join HCCLA
  • Media
  • HCCLA Blog

Upcoming Events

  • CLE: Code of Criminal Procedure: Chapter 1
    Wed Oct 15 2025, 7:00pm CDT - 9:00pm CDT
  • Pickleball Tournament
    Sat Oct 18 2025
  • CLE: Code of Criminal Procedure: Chapter 2 (Part 1)
    Wed Oct 22 2025, 7:00pm CDT - 9:00pm CDT

Contact Us

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

    

Copyright © 2025 · Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association. The HCCLA logo is a registered trademark.