Reality of the Courts

Last week, I finished up an OUI case with one of my clients.  When this client first came into my office, I read the police report and listened to his version of the events.  While I didn’t completely believe everything my client was telling me, I didn’t quite buy the story the police officer was telling, and he seemed to have a fairly decent case.  The only test the police officer was able to get my client to perform was the eye test (horizontal gaze nystagmus), and that test had a good chance of being suppressed.  My client refused to do any other tests, to include the breathalyzer.  So ultimately, the only evidence against my client was the officer’s observations, and those observations could be explained in any number of ways.  There were also several holes in the officer’s story, and a few things that didn’t make sense.  However, as with any case, I wanted to see all that the District Attorney had before we started getting ahead of ourselves.

The discovery took a couple of months to get, and we were on our third pretrial hearing by the time the discovery came in last week.  All of a sudden, this really good case that I had started looking dismal.  The complete police report mentions two other officers that were on the scene, as well as the Chief of Police who had to assist my client into the booking room because he could not walk in on his own.  I also learned about two civilian witnesses and three firefighters who were on scene due to possible medical issues.  Each one of these witnesses was prepared to testify that my client was, quite literally, falling down drunk.  Although my client wanted to call this a conspiracy and attempt to prove so at trial, I had to point out to him the reality of the courts.  We were in a court that favors the police and prosecution.  I could have poked holes in the officer’s report, but if we were to go to trial, with the testimony of the witnesses against my client, there was a strong likelihood that we would have lost…bad.  And when it came to sentencing, the judge would have undoubtedly been harsh because, if for no other reason, the Chief of Police felt the need to come into court to testify in this case.  The judge would have looked at this as though we were wasting the court’s time, as well as the time of the Chief.  It wouldn’t have been pretty.

I managed to work out a really good deal for my client, but the end result is not what either of us were hoping for.  No matter how good your case is, I can’t stress the importance of waiting until that discovery comes in before making a full assessment.  You never have the entire story from an initial consultation, or from an initial police report.  There’s always more to the story, and sometimes that something more is compelling to one side or the other.  Also, you need to know your courts.  What may work in some courts won’t necessarily work in others.  Every judge is different.  Although neutral, every judge is going to look through the filter from a different perspective.  I have worked with some judges who look at all of the evidence through a filter that is in the light most favorable to the Defendant.  Others will look at it in a light most favorable to the Prosecutor.  Know which way your judge is going to lean before you fully assess your case.  And as always, consult with an attorney before trying to represent yourself.  It may turn out to be the deciding factor in your case.