Careful what you wish for
Someone needs to explain to me why this case ever made it to SCOTUS. Actually, I have several questions:
- What are you asking for, exactly?
- Is this a case of getting too greedy or too literal?
- Did anyone consider the ramifications of an unfavorable decision in this case? (Let me spell it out for you: it could spell complete evisceration of a well-established and solidly pro-defense line of cases starting with Santobello)
- How do you get selected to argue in front of SCOTUS and then produce a complete clunker [pdf] (and not just one counsel – both!)?
- Does anyone think either lawyer has any clue as to what is being asked of them?
I fear that Puckett might win the battle, but lose the war. That would be bad news for all of us.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Gideon on January 23, 2009 at 12:36 am, and is filed under clients, fifth amendment, supreme court. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 1 year ago
That was a lame oral argument, but how much better could the guy have done?
I don’t understand your question about why this case made it to SCOTUS. Defense attorneys don’t represent defendants as a whole, they represent individuals. This guy Puckett has some skin in the game here.
Speaking of plea bargains, Gid, care to go toe to toe on the “I would have accepted the plea but my attorney was incompetent so therefore I should get the benefit of the plea deal even though I went to trial”? You’ve ducked that one.
about 1 year ago
“ducked”? I don’t think so. We discussed this a while back and ever since then I’ve just ignored your repeated attempts to revisit the issue.
about 1 year ago
Actually, you mentioned that you would be able to rebut the problem that Cronic presents. It never happened. I think you realize that while a few liberal judges more interested in helping criminals than the law will swallow the argument, logic dictates that it’s a dead dog loser.
In any event, did you see Stevens whining about the government picking a choosing its cases? Waaaaaaaaah.
about 1 year ago
Well, somebody felt that they did a heckuva job…
about 1 year ago
I saw that. Obviously, I’m sure that they put a lot of hard work into preparing for the argument and anyone who can get up there and argue before the Supreme Court has done a good job.
However, the argument seemed like it was rather painful. It’s happened to me too. I feel like I did the best I could.
about 1 year ago
Whaddya think of van de Kamp v. Goldstein?