Archive for the 'Courts of Law' Category

Lawyer Held in Contempt of Court for Pretending to Masturbate

Can the law ever become too lenient? Everybody is familiar with the tag line “ignorance of the law excuses no one” and true to its strictest sense, no one, even those in privileged positions are excused from any of the provisions of the law. If you committed your transgressions and violated any of these provisions of the law, you are directly subjected to the scrutinizing eyes of the court. When faced with such a prospect, you need to protect yourself and get a legal professional to defend you.

Expectations for a Defense Lawyer

Who else do you turn to other than a defense lawyer? Typically, the government provides the services of a public defense lawyer should the person be financially incapable of paying for their legal counsel. Of course, a defendant with financial means at the disposal can definitely bring forth his personal lawyer.

Now, what are the usual thoughts that go through your mind when thinking about the services that a defense lawyer will provide for you? Are they not supposed to be the ones defending their clients against the impending punishment looming over their heads? Moreover, defense lawyers are also expected to keep abreast of the entirety of the list of laws which the Constitution or the Law of the Land embodies. Lawyers are also expected to carry themselves with dignity, professionalism, and style at all times as well. This entire concept has been entirely shoved to the side in the case of attorney Adam Reposa.

Defense Attorney Adam Reposa Crosses the Line

Attorney Adam Bulletproof Reposa, esq. | Collage of His Images

At 33, Adam Reposa, an Austin defense lawyer was charged with criminal contempt of court as he made the gross mistake of committing lewd gestures in the courtroom right before the eyes of County Court-at-Law Judge Jan Breland. Reposa allegedly aimed his simulated masturbatory gesture directly at Judge Breland and the judge found this act to be malicious and contemptuous, to say the least. As a result, the Austin defense lawyer was led out of the Heman Sweatt Travis County courtroom bearing handcuffs. For this misdemeanor, defense lawyer Reposa has been sentenced to jail for a period of 90 days. District Judge Paul Davis has stressed that he was proud to clear things out in order to “uphold the integrity of the judicial process”.

How Reposa gesture came about was while defending his client on the charge of driving while under the influence of alcohol. What the court didn’t expect was the dramatic turn of of events. In the course of representing his client, he suddenly looked directly at prosecutor Richard Gentry, rolled his eyes, and pulled off the obscene gesture during the pretrial hearing. Judge Breland found Reposa’s actions to be “intentional and contumacious conduct during the court’s review of the plea bargain offer to his client before jury trial.”

When Contempt is Part of the Legal Picture

The Honorable Judge Jan Breland Image

In basic terms, contempt of court is a civil infringement with a criminal punishment. Retired Judge Davis was assigned to hear the complaint filed by Judge Brendal. Judge Davis clarified that contempt of court is a complaint filed against a persona whenever the court decorum is violated for any grounds applicable. The judge noted that Reposa seemed to be undecided on whether to admit his fault or justify his act because he reportedly did both things during the hearing that took place in the county attorney’s office. Reposa also tried to argue that he didn’t intend the gesture for the judge but instead it was meant for the prosecutor.

In case you were wondering, Reposa’s name is listed on the State Bar Web site as Adam “Bulletproof” Reposa.

The State of Texas v. LeCharles Williams | Judgment of Criminal Contempt of Court by Adam Reposa

(Click to view image full-size)

Arnold Schwarzenegger Wants a Civil Right to Counsel Pilot Project

From shlep:

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has included a civil right to counsel pilot project in his newly-submitted Budget 2007 - 2008. Here’s how the California Budget website summarizes the proposal:

Access to Justice Pilot Program - The Budget includes $5 million General Fund, on a three-year limited-term basis, to implement a pilot program in three Superior Courts to identify and provide representation to unrepresented litigants in a wide range of civil matters, including domestic violence restraining orders, family law, child support, paternity, unlawful detainer, and probate. This pilot program will improve the courts’ ability to handle its entire caseload and help relieve court congestion.

    The staff of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School says “The proposed $5 million pilot program would deliver funding on a three-year limited-term basis to provide counsel for pro se litigants in high stakes civil matters.”” (via Cyrus Dugger at TortDeform weblog, Jan. 19, 2007) The civil right to counsel is a major focus of the Brennan Center’s Access to Justice program. Last year, two staff members published “State Statutes Providing for a Right to Counsel in Civil Cases,” Clearinghouse Review Journal of Poverty Law and Policy, by Laura K. Abel and Max Rettig, July–August 2006 (26-pp pdf). Here’s the introduction to that article:

    “Over the past few decades, states have passed hundreds of laws and court rules guaranteeing the right to counsel in a wide variety of civil cases. These laws have received little attention and merit more. They are surprising in their number (in the hundreds) and in the many different types of cases they cover (family law matters, involuntary commitment proceedings, medical treatment, and many others). They also vary widely in the extent to which they ensure that the counsel provided is competent and effective. In this article we give an overview of the statutes and rules.

    “The genesis of state right-to-counsel laws varies. Some implement court decisions establishing a constitutional right to counsel in one or more types of proceedings. Others implement federal laws requiring the provision of counsel to specific types of individuals, such as members of the military or Indian children facing removal from their parents. Still others flow from a legislature’s belief that providing counsel in a particular type of case is good social policy.

    “Here we discuss the types of cases where a statute or court rule provides for a right to counsel and the extent to which state right-to-counsel statutes attempt to ensure that counsel is competent. A table of a cross-section of state right-to-counsel statutes follows.”

    blackCheckS Abel & Rettig put together a lengthy table showing state laws mandating (or giving discrection to appoint) civil counsel in many subject areas. Of course, there may be additional laws or amendments since publication.

    Get Caught Stealing and Face Public Humiliation

    Imagine carrying a sign in front of the local courthouse that reads: “I stole from a local store.”

    Imagine doing that at 12pm. Under the hot beating sun. With sweat dripping down your forehead. For two hours.

    If you get caught stealing and you end up in Putnam County Judge Peter Miller’s courtroom, that just might be your punishment.

    ”It is better than going to jail, but it’s not fair,” said Rashane Lewis, who was arrested for being the lookout in a Wal-Mart while a friend of hers took some children clothes.

    Over the past twelve years, Judge Miller has sentenced over 600 people to these unusual punishments either outside the courthouse or at the store where the incident took place. Walking around with an embrassing sign is his preferred method to deal with shoplifters.

    How to steal from Wal-Mart and not get caught. And wear a sign.According to the administration of the Putnam Count probation system has said only three of Judge Miller’s sign carriers has repeated their offense. He, along with other judges around the United States believe that public penitence, involving some sort of public humiliation works to rehabilitate convicted offenders.

    ‘If you see someone marching up and down in front of a store, you may think twice before stealing. I’m not going to say it is going to prevent it, but it will stop the one who did it from doing it again,” said Judge Miller.

    He gives the offenders an option. Take a 30-60 day jail sentence or endure two hours of public embarassment. Along with their choice, they must perform 25 hours of community service, they have six months of probation and they are fined $294.

    Like I mentioned earlier, Judge Miller isn’t the only judge in the U.S. to have these unusual and creative sentencing ideas.

    Take Ohio Municipal Court Judge Michael A. Cicconetti in Painesville for example. Teens had yelled “Pigs” to some local police officers. He had the teens stand on a busy street corner with a pig and a sign reading, “This is not a police officer.” He had three men who were arrested for soliciting prostitution wear chicken suits and carry a sign with them that read, “There is no chicken ranch in Painesville.” He also sentenced a couple who stole a baby Jesus statue from a manger to dress up as the Virgin Mary and Joseph and walk around Painesville with a donkey at their side.

    In Harris County, Texas Judge Larry Standley had a man who hit his wife take yoga classes as a form of anger management.

    In San Francisco, a man convicted of mail fraud was sentence by a judge to walk outside of a post office with a sign reading, “I stole mail. This is my punishment.”

    “We don’t like it, but what he does is legal,” says Assistant Public Defender Mack Brunton. “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that this is his way to encourage them not to do it again. It seems to work fairly well.” When defendents are given the option of either jail or carrying a sign, most people “cringe.”

    “They hate it. They would rather jump off a cliff than carry the sign. They would pay more money. They would swim the English Channel,” says Mr. Brunton.

    There is precedent for these public humiliation sentences in history, so don’t think this is anything new. Back in colonial times, those that broke the law were made to sit in stocks, which consisted of a frame in which the culprit’s hands and/or feet were confined while the offender remained seated. Villagers would taunt these people and throw rotten fruits and vegetables. And yes, they would sometimes even throw excrement. That’s when you know your neighbors really don’t like you.

    A Connecticut professor at the Quinnipiac University School of Law named Quilliam V. Dunlap has researched cases that end in an usual sentence. He hasn’t come across any studies that reveal anything about whether jail time or public humiliation is a better crime deterrent.

    ”They don’t amount to cruel and unusual punishment. They are unusual, but most of them as not as cruel as sending someone to jail or prison,” said Mr. Dunlap.

    Even though it may be preferable to jail time, those that have to undergo the humiliation don’t seem to like it. “This is just a humiliating stunt,” said Wal-Mart shoplifter Rashane Lewis.