Archive for March 10, 2009
When is an assault not an assault?
Mar 10th
When it’s a strangulation. Yes, as of 2008, the Connecticut legislature has created the crime of “Strangulation” (I’d link to it, but it isn’t up on the website yet).
Is it redundant? What does it really mean? Let’s find out! The first step, of course, is to conduct an elements analysis. There are two degrees of strangulation, both felonies. Let’s start with Strangulation in the First Degree:
(a) A person is guilty of strangulation in the first degree when such person commits strangulation in the second degree as provided in section 53a-64bb and (1) in the commission of such offense, such person (A) uses or attempts to use a dangerous instrument, or (B) causes serious physical injury to such other person, or (2) such person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or section 53a-64bb.
Huh? Okay, let’s look at Strangulation in the Second Degree (53a-64bb):
(a) A person is guilty of strangulation in the second degree when such person restrains another person by the neck or throat with the intent to impede the ability of such other person to breathe or restrict blood circulation of such other person and such person impedes the ability of such other person to breathe or restricts blood circulation of such other person.
Here’s what I don’t understand. How do you commit strangulation in the second degree without using a “dangerous instrument”? Especially in light of the fact that hands (or fists or feet or limbs) may be “dangerous instruments”:
Now Hiring
Mar 10th
[Note: This is a "sticky" post. There may be more recent posts beneath this one.]
To: Connecticut Public Defenders
From: apublicdefender.com Management
Re: Job opening
You people would make terrible eyewitnesses
Mar 10th
The poll results from the eyewitness ID poll reveals either that I’ve got a bunch of non-attentive readers or (more likely) that there’s no way anyone can identify anyone from that array. They all looked the same to me, btw.
So, for those of you interested in the “answer”, it’s after the jump.
Listen up!
Mar 10th
We talk a lot, as lawyers. It’s in our job description. The old classic misnomer is that if you can debate or argue well, you’ll make a good lawyer. We do it all the time: we talk to judges, we talk to clients, we talk to each other. Talk, talk, talk. It gets exhausting after a while.
The one thing no one tells us to do, or teaches us to do, is listen. Listening is just as important as talking in our line of work (in any, really). Over the past month, I’ve seen clients get angry at their lawyers because the lawyers didn’t listen, I’ve seen lawyers lose out on good deals because they didn’t listen to judges.
It isn’t that hard, or is it? Are we that ego-centric that all we care about is spewing our bit and then watching it waft into the world, while the important information from those around us misses us.
It really is the death-knell for a good lawyer – the inability to listen.
I was already resolute in my decision to listen, but the past month has made me that much more sure. Try it sometime; it might surprise you.
recent comments