Dating opposing counsel
The use of the forensic examination and dating of inks on questioned documents has become common, and law enforcement agencies rely heavily on these techniques during criminal investigations whenever there is some question as to when a document was written. In this book, the authors describe the many advances that have occurred in the field of forensic examination and dating of inks on documents. Actual laboratory procedures for examining and dating inks and other related substances are described, as well as the forensic applications of these techniques in criminal and civil litigations. In addition, the authors provide discussion theories for each type of chemical analysis which serve as useful guidelines for explaining the science to lay juries. This book will be useful to chemists involved in dating examination work, lawyers trying cases using these techniques, and professors teaching in the field of forensic sciences. In addition, it will be useful serving as a methods manual and reference text for forensic science students.SEE VIDEO BY TOPIC: Court Etiquettes During Arguments, how to address the Court & opposing Counsel
SEE VIDEO BY TOPIC: Our Wedding Date Is Set — Why Not Have Sex Now // Ask Pastor JohnContent:
State Bar Ethics Opinions cite the applicable California Rules of Professional Conduct in effect at the time of the writing of the opinion. Please refer to the California Rules of Professional Conduct Cross Reference Chart for a table indicating the corresponding current operative rule.
There, you can also link to the text of the current rule. What are the ethical considerations in California when a deputy public defender and a deputy district attorney for the same county are married to one another? Court approval may also be required. No disclosure need be made or consent obtained by either attorney in the case. This opinion addresses the ethical issues raised in California when a deputy public defender and a deputy district attorney for the same county are married to one another.
Specifically, four hypothetical situations are examined below:. When the public defender spouse represents a client being prosecuted by the district attorney spouse;. When the public defender spouse represents a client being prosecuted by a colleague of the district attorney spouse;.
When a colleague of the public defender spouse represents a client being prosecuted by the district attorney spouse; and. When a colleague of the public defender spouse represents a client being prosecuted by a colleague of the district attorney spouse. For purposes of this opinion, we have assumed, in the above listed situations, that "representation" means any work on behalf of the accused, in or out of the courtroom, and at any stage of the criminal proceedings.
Similarly, we have assumed that "prosecution" means any work on behalf of the People with respect to the criminal case at hand, in or out of the courtroom, and at any stage of the criminal proceedings, including its investigation or related grand jury proceedings.
The first and most difficult of these four situations involves the representation of an accused by a deputy public defender who is married to the prosecutor of the accused. As outlined below, the Committee finds no single ethical rule in California directly applicable but concludes from a number of authorities that disclosure of the relationship, client consent and possibly court approval may be necessary for this sort of representation to go forward.
Perhaps the most fundamental quality of the attorney-client relationship is the absolute and complete fidelity owed by the attorney to his or her client. State Bar 71 Cal. It is that total loyalty to the interests of the client which makes possible and encourages the confidences essential to effective attorney-client communications and, as important, to the administration of justice. An early Court of Appeal said, "[a]n attorney at law should be a paragon of candor, fairness, honor and fidelity in all his dealings with those who place their trust in his ability and integrity, and he will at all times and under all circumstances be held to the full measure of what he ought to be.
Rossen 12 Cal. Thus, the threshold question for an attorney as soon as he or she learns of this first situation - as the defense counsel or as the prosecutor - is whether he or she feels there would he any possibility of a dilution of that duty of complete fidelity to the client due to the marital relationship with the opposing counsel. If the attorney believes that the nature or quality of representation would be adversely affected in any manner by that factor, the attorney should not accept employment on that matter because it would involve a violation of the aforesaid duty of total loyalty.
However, assuming that the lawyer feels he or she can effectively represent the client the accused or the People despite the marital relationship with the opposing counsel, the next question is whether disclosure of that relationship to the client is ethically required coupled with the client's consent to the representation in light of that relationship.
Nevertheless, we are of the unanimous view that the ethical and prudent attorney would make such a disclosure and would accept such employment only upon the client's written consent thereto.
There are several independent reasons which, collectively support this conclusion. The closest Rule of Professional Conduct, rule A 2 provides:.
A member of the State Bar who accepts employment under this rule shall first obtain the client's written consent to such employment. This rule is not directly controlling because it refers only to a "relation The same concern is present in the case of a marital relationship to the counsel for the adversary, and thus the client should be appropriately informed and be permitted to make the final decision, whatever the attorney's own good faith beliefs about his or her ability to be a full and vigorous advocate.
The above quoted California Rule of Professional Conduct and the policy behind it are in accord with the treatment of the general question of married counsel by the American Bar Association's Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Although neither the rules nor the opinions of the A. In its Formal Opinion , issued in September , the A. Like all lawyers, they must obey all disciplinary rules; a particular situation may be inherently difficult because of the close relationship between husband and wife.
In any situation where a client or potential client might question the loyalty of the lawyer representing him, the situation should be fully explained to the client and the question of acceptance or continuance of representation left to the client for decision.
It is significant that in the A. As noted in footnote 2 above, California has not adopted the "appearance of impropriety" standard into its Rules of Professional Conduct. Nevertheless, California courts have engrafted an equivalent standard upon the conduct of attorneys in criminal cases in overseeing the fair and impartial administration of the criminal justice system, wholly apart from any R.
See People v. Conner 34 Cal. Superior Court Greer 19 Cal. Rhodes 12 Cal. Superior Court 77 Cal. Municipal Court Wolfe 69 Cal. Compare Love v. Superior Court Cal. The common thread in these decisions is that both the public and the defendant must not have any reason to question the fairness or objectivity of counsel involved in criminal prosecutions.
Both these ends are best served when counsel in the fact situation presented here make a proper disclosure to the respective client and obtain a written consent to the representation. Otherwise, as indicated in the ethics opinions from the other states cited in footnote 2 above, the situation could pose a classic "appearance of impropriety" scenario, pregnant with the possibilities for misunderstandings by the accused and the public.
Moreover, the situation presents, absent such disclosure and consent, a very strong likelihood of creating a case of apparent prejudicial error which would impel a reviewing court to reverse any resulting conviction or guilty plea. That would be manifestly unfair to all parties concerned - the accused, the People, and the courts. Although no California case has yet considered the situation of criminal defense counsel being married to the prosecutor, a very recent Court of Appeal case People v.
Jackson Cal. In that case, the defense attorney was not engaged to or living with the assistant district attorney but had been seeing her on a regular social basis for several months prior to the representation in question.
This relationship was not disclosed to the defendant or the court although the trial court was informed after the trial and before sentencing. The Court of Appeal specifically found that no confidential defense information was disclosed and that the defense counsel believed he had no disabling conflict of interest, and no actual prejudice to the defendant was disclosed. Nevertheless, the Jackson court reversed the resulting conviction due to defense counsel's failure to disclose the relationship and the lack consent by the defendant after disclosure.
The Court of Appeal, after citing the above line of cases wrote:. Rosenfeld 9th Cir. Such an apparently close relationship between counsel directly opposing each other in a criminal prosecution naturally and reasonably gives rise to speculation that the professional judgment of counsel as well as the zealous representation to which an accused is entitled has been compromised. No matter how well intentioned defense counsel is in carrying out his responsibilities to the accused, he may be subject to subtle influences manifested, for example, in a reluctance to engage in abrasive confrontation and trial advocacy.
See Rhodes , supra , 12 Cal. A criminal defendant's 'right to decide for himself who best can conduct the case must be respected wherever feasible.
Superior Court , supra , 30 Cal. Crovedi 65 Cal. Accordingly, counsel involved in a potential conflict situation such as that disclosed by this record may not proceed with the defense without first explaining fully to the accused the nature of his relationship with opposing counsel and affording the accused the opportunity, if he so desires, to secure counsel unencumbered by potential divided loyalties.
Given the nature of the relationship shown here, the absence of disclosure inevitably fuels informed speculation as to the existence of a disabling conflict. Defendant is then left with no recourse but to impugn the loyalty and adequacy of his appointed counsel. Rhodes , supra , at p. Since the situation created by counsel's lack of disclosure defies its quantification, actual prejudice need not be shown by defendant is a condition to relief.
A potential if not an actual conflict has been demonstrated and thus appearance, at least, of impropriety. In these circumstances, we are foreclosed from 'indulg[ing] in nice calculations as to the amount of [resulting] prejudice.
The Committee concludes that, a fortiori , failure to disclose a marital relationship between the defense counsel and the prosecutor and to obtain client consent would probably lead to serious legal issues upon any appeal. Given the particular role of a public defender or any criminal defense attorney in protecting the rights of the accused, if both attorneys are to remain on the same case, the defense attorney spouse should ensure that the prospective client is fully informed of that attorney's marital relationship to the prosecutor and of the client's absolute right to have a different defense attorney assigned or appointed to conduct the accused's representation.
Jackson , supra , Cal. If the client elects to give such a consent to the public defender spouse, that attorney should be satisfied that such consent was given in a knowing and intelligent fashion. See Johnson v. Zerbst U. That may require some explanation to illustrate for the client the possible hazards for the client that, at least theoretically, might lie within the existence of such a marital relationship.
The Committee expressly presumes that the public defender spouse, would in good faith attempt to comply with all ethical obligations in these regards. The Committee is also cognizant of normal husband-wife interactions and discussions, particularly when they are both professionals involved in the same field of practice and, as postulated here, appearing daily before the same judges in similar or even related cases.
The client should simply be made aware of the possibility of an accidental and wholly unintended slip which might conceivably impair his or her case. The A. Disclosure should therefore cover the potential dangers of such inadvertent communication of client confidences or unconscious deference to or consideration for the district attorney spouse. A comparably full and candid disclosure by the prosecutor spouse should be made as well, which, in that attorney's case, should be made directly to the District Attorney of the county.
This Committee has previously considered whether any government official may give a consent to waive some apparent conflicts of interest under R. Formal Opinion What this Committee said in bears repeating here:. The public entrusts such decisions to their officials. There is nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct or in case law which would prohibit officials from providing the consent required by rule or B of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
We affirm this conclusion and apply it herein as well: the District Attorney, after being fully informed of the marital relationship and of the potential risks to the People's case, may give the consent on behalf of the People required for the deputy district attorney spouse to prosecute an accused represented by that deputy's spouse.
There is no clear statutory or ethical requirement for court approval of the representation after disclosure has been made and the client's written consent has been obtained.
However, People v. This Committee must caution all attorneys involved in this precise situation including the supervising district attorney and public defender of the two spouses to examine the judicial authorities cited in section 3 above.
Although none addresses the precise postulated facts here, all have adopted a stringent "appearance of impropriety" standard in criminal cases.
As noted in footnote 3, in every other jurisdiction examined by this opinion where such an appearance of impropriety" rule was applied, such a direct confrontation between counsel married to one another, even with disclosure and consent , was forbidden. Prudence may therefore dictate that, despite the apparent ability of both the affected parties--the accused and the People, as represented by the district attorney--to give a valid consent, one or the other spouse should decline the matter, simply to avoid creating an unnecessary issue for counsel, the parties, the trial court and, ultimately, the reviewing courts.
Indeed, the supervisors of such married attorneys may well wish to arrange the schedules or assignments of these attorneys so they will not have to oppose one another. If that arrangement is not feasible and one of the spouses must be excused from a particular case, one pragmatic approach to determining which spouse should decline the case is to assess which spouse has the later or lesser involvement therein.
Lawyer Suspended for Creating False Match.com Profile to Harass Opposing Counsel
Aliens have come to Earth! Get four books in one boxed set. Pastry chef Lexi Sutterman has lived in the shadow of her wealthy, hypercritical family. When Aton arrives, he proves beyond all doubt to be the man of her dreams: tall, sexy, romantic, and devoted to her.
Sometimes, a legal blogger has to hunt for topics to write about. Q: I am an attorney. Although we only talk business, from my perspective we get along well. The first is whether she is in a relationship. How can I ask her out, or even speak with her in a nonbusiness setting to see if she has any interest?
Things to Know About Dating a Female Lawyer
There are many strange things. Lawyers are creatures who think differently; we have what my husband calls an infuriating ability to be objective. Personally, I think dating a lawyer would be wonderful for those reasons alone, but I realize there are others who may disagree. For that reason, I bring you the pros and cons of dating a lawyer. Yes, we like to argue, but a lot of us like peace at home after a long day of arguing at the office. They place a high premium on calm. This can be true even of lady lawyers who are dating or married to male lawyers!. It may just be her way of making conversation. The flip side of our tendency to argue and criticize is our ability to be sensitive and empathic.
2019 Formal Ethics Opinion 3
Account Options Sign in. Essentials of Forensic Accounting. Michael A. Crain , William S. Hopwood , Richard S.
The model rules set forth specific guidelines defining the attorney-client relationship. An attorney will be guilty of misconduct, for example, if she or he fails to provide competent representation to a client, to act with diligence and promptness regarding a client's legal concerns, or to keep a client informed of legal proceedings. Charging exorbitant fees or overbilling is also considered misconduct, as is counseling a client to commit a crime.
The Legal Ethics Of Going On A Date With Opposing Counsel
State Bar Ethics Opinions cite the applicable California Rules of Professional Conduct in effect at the time of the writing of the opinion. Please refer to the California Rules of Professional Conduct Cross Reference Chart for a table indicating the corresponding current operative rule. There, you can also link to the text of the current rule.SEE VIDEO BY TOPIC: Divorce Lawyers Give Relationship Advice - Glamour
Most of us lawyers are honest when we say we are not available for a court date. No, I can't say all - that would neither be realistic nor true no slight intended for the lawyers in this case. In contentious cases however, almost everyone is paranoid and doesn't easily believe what they are being told. It can be easy for a lawyer to be suspicious of the other lawyer continuously saying they are unavailable for your applications. But the questions remains : why is it that when opposing counsel wants to set down an application they are available almost every day, but when it comes to my application, they are not available for sometimes more than a month?
FORMAL OPINION NO. 1984-83
Opinion rules that an ongoing sexual relationship between opposing counsel creates a conflict of interest in violation of Rule 1. The Rules of Professional Conduct apply to all lawyers in their various representative capacities. Accordingly, although this opinion is based upon a scenario involving representation in a criminal matter, the conduct at issue may threaten the integrity of both the criminal and civil justice systems, and therefore the analysis contained herein is applicable to lawyers in both criminal and civil matters. Lawyer A is an assistant district attorney in District Q. Lawyer B represents criminal defendants in District Q.
Сомнений не. В ярком свете уличного фонаря на углу Беккер увидел. Молодые люди поднялись по ступенькам, и двигатель автобуса снова взревел. Беккер вдруг понял, что непроизвольно рванулся вперед, перед его глазами маячил только один образ - черная помада на губах, жуткие тени под глазами и эти волосы… заплетенные в три торчащие в разные стороны косички. Красную, белую и синюю.
Внезапно он почувствовал страх, которого никогда не испытывал. Беккер наклонил голову и открыл дроссель до конца. Веспа шла с предельной скоростью. Прикинув, что такси развивает миль восемьдесят - чуть ли не вдвое больше его скорости, - он сосредоточил все внимание на трех ангарах впереди.
- Танкадо обманул всех. По его тону ей стало ясно, что он все понял. Вся ложь Танкадо о невскрываемом алгоритме… обещание выставить его на аукцион - все это было игрой, мистификацией. Танкадо спровоцировал АНБ на отслеживание его электронной почты, заставил поверить, что у него есть партнер, заставил скачать очень опасный файл.
Он стоит десять раз по двадцать миллионов. - Увы, - сказал Нуматака, которому уже наскучило играть, - мы оба знаем, что Танкадо этого так не оставит.
15 утра. Акт безжалостного уничтожения. Бесчувственная демонстрация силы страной, уже добившейся победы. С этим Танкадо сумел примириться. Но он не смог примириться с тем, что этот взрыв лишил его возможности познакомиться с собственной матерью.
Фактически Сьюзан создала программу-маяк направленного действия, замаскированный под элемент электронной почты. Она отправляла его на фиктивный адрес этого клиента, и переадресующая компания, выполняя свои договорные обязательства, пересылала этот маяк на подлинный адрес. Попав по назначению, программа фиксировала свое местонахождение в Интернете и передавала его в АНБ, после чего бесследно уничтожала маяк. Начиная с того дня, анонимные переадресующие компании перестали быть для АНБ источником серьезных неприятностей.
- Вы сможете его найти? - спросил Стратмор. - Конечно.
Ну и ну… - Беккер с трудом сдержал улыбку. - И что же ты ответила. Она ткнула его в ногу носком туфли. - Я сказала нет! - И, выдержав паузу, добавила: - И до вчерашней ночи это была правда.