What do you think a lawyer should get paid to defend a criminal accused of murder who faces the death penalty?
(if you said $12,000 the state of MO agrees with you)
They just executed a man & he was appealing on the grounds his original attorneys did not properly defend him or have the death penalty taken off the table in exchange for his guilty plea. He was also having a psychotic (drug induced) episode when the crime was committed. 70 prison guards & the warden wrote letters in his support.
This seems like just another travesty of justice.... also, again FUCK SCOTUS.
Post by StrawberryBlondie on Apr 9, 2024 20:39:06 GMT -5
I read about this case earlier today and have questions.... Did he have a public defender or private counsel? If it was a public defender, why aren't they paid a salary? If it was a private attorney, $12,000 seems low (it would be bargain basement around here) but I don't know what legal fees run down there. Further, the article says his attorneys didn't get anything in exchange for his guilty plea... is it that they weren't *successful* at that, or did they not attempt?
I'm against the death penalty, but I don't think this article does a particularly good job of explaining what is so terribly problematic about this case to warrant a stay of execution.
Read about this, and sorry if I missed it, but wasn’t the payment from the state for his appointed defense attorney the same regardless of the case complexity, charges, potential outcomes?
Ie I get paid $12k from the state as a public defender for a minimal infraction vs my other case that could be 5, 10, life in prison or execution?
Instead of your outrage on SCOTUS, I’d point your anger to the state governor (R).
I read about this case earlier today and have questions.... Did he have a public defender or private counsel? If it was a public defender, why aren't they paid a salary? If it was a private attorney, $12,000 seems low (it would be bargain basement around here) but I don't know what legal fees run down there. Further, the article says his attorneys didn't get anything in exchange for his guilty plea... is it that they weren't *successful* at that, or did they not attempt?
I'm against the death penalty, but I don't think this article does a particularly good job of explaining what is so terribly problematic about this case to warrant a stay of execution.
He had a public defender who was paid a flat fee of $12k.
There are other articles around the ethics, concerns, etc that were raised by his attorney(s) on this set up. I’m not saying the outcome was right or wrong, but agree if a discussion should be had here then further context matters from what OP wrote.
Like most of us, I’ve been following the absolute insanity of the endless motions of the Trump lawyers in his criminal defenses. The absolute relentless abuse of every angle and corner of the justice system to delay and obscure the process. I keep coming back to the thought “Wow, it’s amazing what you can do with 100+ million dollars of other people’s money in legal fees.”
This right here is the other end of the system. The powerless end.
I think we all think that the justice system works as an equalizer of sorts. That at the end of the day, good people don’t get punished severely or at least not executed. That’s why those 70 affidavits of support by the very people employed by the justice system, who know this inmate the best is so heartbreaking.
Read about this, and sorry if I missed it, but wasn’t the payment from the state for his appointed defense attorney the same regardless of the case complexity, charges, potential outcomes?
Ie I get paid $12k from the state as a public defender for a minimal infraction vs my other case that could be 5, 10, life in prison or execution?
Instead of your outrage on SCOTUS, I’d point your anger to the state governor (R).
Ok, reading between the lines, that's kind of what I assumed and if that's true, that's definitely a terrible way to compensate public defenders and I can see how it *could* lead to some really bad defense and bad outcomes.
However, maybe this is just a really badly written article, but I don't see any evidence that in this case it *did.* This was a really brutal and really terrible crime, so it wouldn't surprise me if the prosecutors were just not willing to offer anything and the outcome would've been the same no matter what the PD compensation structure was. I just see quite a lot of talk about how he's such a great person now. Which I don't doubt is true, but I also don't think that's sufficient to overturn a death sentence.
Again, I'm against the death penalty so I don't think anyone should be sentenced to death in the first place, I'm talking about the criteria to overturn an sentence.
I think the issue of pleading guilty to the crime blocks or negates or otherwise cuts off a defendant from legal avenues that are otherwise available to stop, review, and/or disqualify for an execution. That anyone giving even the most minimal legal advice would NOT advise a defended to put forward a “guilty” plea without securing a plea deal that takes execution off the table.
It’s just so basic that it demonstrates the egregiousness of the lack of legal counsel or effort by the PD.
I think the issue of pleading guilty to the crime blocks or negates or otherwise cuts off a defendant from legal avenues that are otherwise available to stop, review, and/or disqualify for an execution. That anyone giving even the most minimal legal advice would NOT advise a defended to put forward a “guilty” plea without securing a plea deal that takes execution off the table.
It’s just so basic that it demonstrates the egregiousness of the lack of legal counsel.
Do we know that they didn't advise this and the client just didn't listen?
I don't practice criminal law, but working out what $12k would be per hour, for the number of hours it would take to competently defend a death penalty case, would illustrate really quickly how economically non-viable it is for attorneys to do that job as over and over, as many times as it takes to become experienced at it.
I think the issue of pleading guilty to the crime blocks or negates or otherwise cuts off a defendant from legal avenues that are otherwise available to stop, review, and/or disqualify for an execution. That anyone giving even the most minimal legal advice would NOT advise a defended to put forward a “guilty” plea without securing a plea deal that takes execution off the table.
It’s just so basic that it demonstrates the egregiousness of the lack of legal counsel.
Do we know that they didn't advise this and the client just didn't listen?
A CNN article references it in their coverage. “Dorsey’s attorneys allege this created a “financial conflict of interest”, which disincentivized work on the case, leading the trial lawyers to have him plead guilty without a guarantee of a life sentence or adequately investigating.” One lawyer denied the flat-fee payment affected their handling of the case. The other did not comment.
Do we know that they didn't advise this and the client just didn't listen?
A CNN article references it in their coverage. “Dorsey’s attorneys allege this created a “financial conflict of interest”, which disincentivized work on the case, leading the trial lawyers to have him plead guilty without a guarantee of a life sentence or adequately investigating.” One lawyer denied the flat-fee payment affected their handling of the case. The other did not comment.
That doesn't say that they didn't attempt though... They could've tried and the prosecutor didn't budge. They can't prevent their client from pleading guilty.
Maybe they really did do nothing and didn't try to negotiate anything in exchange and if that's the case then yes, that's terrible. But I don't think that's answered.