I love the old westerns, and especially Clint Eastwood movies. My wife marvels that I am able to watch them over and over without boredom. They are simple, justice is quick and efficient, and I can relate to the code of respect. The people in these movies are usually very black and white, good and bad are easily
discernible.
Recently, I was critiqued on Craigslist. It was not very flattering, but I guess if I can accept those testimonials that see me as saintly I must recognize that there will be those others who see me as the devil. You would be hard pressed not to know who I am, what I stand for, my education, my training, my experience, how long I have practiced, where I have practiced, what seminars I have attended, in fact I will make a bold statement, I am probably one of the most open lawyers or people online.
I am neither devil nor saint, although I have played both roles. For the record I take full responsibility for anyone who does not understand something I may have said. I believe that the communicator shall do his or her best to be understood and clear.
I primarily represent people for DWI cases, and these cases are difficult to defend. Some people come to see me with an expectation of "getting off" the charges. I have spoken before about the reality of "getting off" and plea negotiations. The truth is that 90% + of all criminal cases in this country settle by way of a plea. Pleas can happen after hearings or conferences or right before a trial. Everyone has the option of having a trial. They cost time and money. They may or may not be beneficial. Juries then decide guilt or innocence.
Cases are always viewed on their merits, on the evidence, on the proof. With DWI "charges" the government does not care how wonderful you are or that you have a job or that you have multiple degrees or if this is your first offense. All those things may be considered at "sentencing" but not for the "charging" of crimes. They (the prosecutors) are interested in whether or not they can prove a DWI (common law and/or "per se") beyond a reasonable doubt.
Generally, if your case has a breath test it is harder to defend than a case without a breath test (a refusal case). If your case has you falling down, driving on the wrong side of the road, hitting curbs, hitting guardrails, admitting to drinking 8 drinks, stating "thank god you got me," or falling asleep while being questioned, then you may have a "harder" case to defend.
Let's deal with reality, dropping your cell phone and hitting one mailbox, ok explainable, dropping your cell phone and hitting four mailboxes on three different streets, not so explainable. I deal with the not so explainable every day, and how much of it a jury can "buy"as in believe, is something most of us can only imagine or try to predict. I work within the facts of every case to come up with the best defense I can. Within the spectrum of cases I see and evaluate there are the good facts, the bad facts, and the ugly facts. Sometimes the good facts outweigh the bad facts. Sometimes I have DWI cases with no drunk (bad) driving. I have a speeding ticket or an expired inspection or bright headlights. Sometimes I have an improperly done breath test or expired chemicals or a person with asthma. Everything that can be looked at gets looked at. But I cannot turn a blind eye to bad facts, they will not go away.
It is a immature mind that thinks that attorneys can change the facts of any case. No matter how "ugly" the facts of a case are, I believe that everyone deserves to be treated fairly throughout the process. My job is to do the best with what is front of me.
