How long can a DA not charge you " at this time"

doofus47

New member
http://www.dailycamera.com/lafayett...afayette-alleged-attempted?source=mostpopular

Summary: ex-boyfriend stalker breaks in woman's home. Woman has bought handgun for self defense. Women squeezes trigger 3 times without a bang. (That's a wholely different gun-related topic, but not the one I want to discuss). The intruder disarms the woman and attempts to kill her. Woman lives. BG is captured.

DA charges bad guy with First degree attempted murder. So, to my mind, there's no way the BG can plead self defense in this situation.
BUT the DA says several times that he has no charges "at this time" for the victim who tried to use a gun in self-defense inside her residence.

How long can the DA twist the victim? If she bought the gun and passed NICS it seems that the firearm is legally owned and not public brandishing. Castle Doctrine truly seems to apply for the attempt to use the firearm in self defense in side her residence. Maybe the authorities are checking to see if she bought it but avoided UBC?

Anyone have any idea what could be going on here? Is there a time limit after which the victim can breath easier again? I'm asking b/c this craptastic local DA has already said that he feels that Colorado's new gun-laws didn't go far enough, so I expect him to try to make ownership onerous. (He's a Republican, btw, so let's not get into politics, just keep the topic centered around legality).

Scratching my head.
 
Anyone have any idea what could be going on here?

Forgive me I’m not trying to be a jerk, but what is going on is an investigation. The DA is seeking all the facts and leaving their options open if new information becomes available.
 
Fair enough, BarryLee:
How long can an "investigation" take? Is there a state-set, local-set, fed-set limit?
That's my question.
 
How long can an "investigation" take?

It takes as long as it takes. I've completed felony investigations in one day, and have had investigations run as long as 18 months. :eek:

As to the original question, suppose the DA announces he won't charge the "victim" then later finds out the "victim" lured the "assailant" to her residence where she attempted to murder him, but was unable to make her weapon work. If that's what the investigation discloses, he'll have a much harder time bringing charges and obtaining a conviction.
 
doofus47 said:
. . . . Anyone have any idea what could be going on here? Is there a time limit after which the victim can breath easier again?
The short answer: after the statute of limitations has run. That's the time limit on charging. There are all kinds of other time limits, such as speedy trial, how long the defendant can be held in custody without being charged, etc.
 
We had a murder case here back in 2004 involving a love triangle. The murderer was picked up just over 24 hours later and confessed. The "Widow" was suspected of being involved but there was not a bit of evidence. They let both of them sit in jail for 4-5 years with no trial before the guy would agree to a deal to testify against his former lover.

This was one of those high profile sensational cases picked up by national media and there have been several "documentaries" aired on TV. I still see one of them in re-runs ever so often.

This was a case of justice being served. But it still bothers me that someone can sit in jail for that long with no trial. I see the potential for abuse by a crooked, or incompetent DA.

http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/01/michelle_reynolds_plotted_with.php
 
...because their defense attorney keeps delaying the trial.
Or, just as often, b/c their defense attorney is a public defender who bungles the case repeatedly. Doesn't show up, isn't ready, doesn't object to frivolous delays by prosecution. Anyone who looks into the public defender system in most jurisdictions just laughs.


Most state codes have the statutes of limitations prominently listed.
 
While this is normal during an investigation I would consult an attorney to see what the statute of limitations is for this event. A prosecutor may delay charges up to the last day of the statute of limitations. Most will charge as soon as possible if they are going to charge at all.
 
johnwilliamson062 said:
Or, just as often, b/c their defense attorney is a public defender who bungles the case repeatedly. Doesn't show up, isn't ready, doesn't object to frivolous delays by prosecution. Anyone who looks into the public defender system in most jurisdictions just laughs....
Where do you get that sort of nonsense? Let's see some documentation.

johnwilliamson062 said:
...Most state codes have the statutes of limitations prominently listed.
While it's true taht statutes of limitation are set out in state codes, it's no always clear which applies in a particular case. Furthermore, various circumstances can stop the clock. So it's not always easy to determine when the statute of limitations has run in a particular case.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...df2b6c-519b-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html
“...he had a newborn baby he didn’t see, because I didn’t look at the case for a month...”
http://articles.mcall.com/1991-01-29/news/2787928_1_mr-ortega-public-defender-county-jail
...a new kind of trial, and it's called trial by neglect.
...Chief Public Defender Fredrick Charles said Ortega's file was misplaced in the office after the public defender representing Ortega quit...
http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/community-oriented-defense-start-now
6 minutes per case.
http://www.pinerivertimes.com/article/20150419/NEWS01/150419846/AWOL-lawyer-delays-trial
PD fails to appear.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/17/poor-rely-public-defenders-too-overworked
"In Florida in 2009, the annual felony caseload per attorney was over 500 felonies and 2,225 misdemeanors."
With that many cases it's hard to believe anyone would get to all of the hearings.

There are just piles and piles of these stories. All different variations.

In the county I am from the public defenders are actually employees of the prosecutors office. Basically bottom of the rung there and get paid significantly less than prosecutors. They have the same office Christmas party. They are mostly trying to get hired/promoted as prosecutors or moved into political positions by the Republican Party(which dominates the county by a wide margin). In both cases, making waves wouldn't be good for advancement.

Have you ever seen the statistics about how lopsided conviction rates are for white and black? Have you looked at how much closer the conviction rates are when you take into consideration whether they used a private attorney or PD? The gap closes significantly. No matter your race, if you use a PD your chances of being convicted are significantly higher.

There is extensive reporting on all this issue and almost no one anywhere is saying there aren't serious problems or that the ruling from Gideon is being observed. It is just no one wants to pay for changes.

Some jurisdictions, like many areas in California, appoint private attorneys. I'm not sure how they compel them to do the work or how they compensate them, but those states seem to have better luck. I'm sure there are still many opportunities for a retired attorney wishing to get some courtroom experience in firearms law.

You are absolutely correct about it not being clear what the charges might be and that making it unclear which limitations apply. In this case the local variation of attempted murder would probably be the highest possible charge. I'd hold my breath until that limitation expired. The only "clock stopping" event I have heard of actually being used was a person going into hiding. "Fleeing" the jurisdiction under a false name.
 
johnwilliamson062 said:
...because their defense attorney keeps delaying the trial.
Or, just as often, b/c their defense attorney is a public defender who bungles the case repeatedly. Doesn't show up, isn't ready, doesn't object to frivolous delays by prosecution. Anyone who looks into the public defender system in most jurisdictions just laughs.
I hardly think that's the case for "most jurisdictions." Both prosecutors' offices and public defender's offices are popular places to work with newly-minted attorneys because they can rack up a lot of trial experience in a short time. That said, there are lots of public defenders who have made a career in those offices. Don't misunderstand me: Public defenders are undoubtedly overworked. That doesn't make them incompetent, though. In spite of the names their own clients call them, most of the PDs I've ever dealt with have been skilled and knowledgeable advocates.

I've often said that the difference between private counsel and public counsel (either prosecution or defense) is that "private counsel comes into the courtroom with 1 case, 1 defendant and 3 witnesses. Public counsel has 25 cases, 25 defendants, and 50 witnesses to deal with." Public defenders are, undoubtedly, overworked and underpaid, and they have my respect, but I don't think it's all fair to say that they often "bungle their cases repeatedly."

johnwilliamson062 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...0f8_story.html
“...he had a newborn baby he didn’t see, because I didn’t look at the case for a month...”
This is a persuasive piece, not necessarily evidence that "[a]nyone who looks into the public defender system in most jurisdictions just laughs." (A good piece, though. I enjoyed reading it.)
johnwilliamson062 said:
http://articles.mcall.com/1991-01-29...er-county-jail
...a new kind of trial, and it's called trial by neglect.
...Chief Public Defender Fredrick Charles said Ortega's file was misplaced in the office after the public defender representing Ortega quit...
While that's a problem, the article was written over 25 years ago: January 25, 1991.

johnwilliamson062 said:
No. "The average amount of time spent by a public defender at arraignment is often less than six minutes per case. And that is when counsel is present and allowed to give information, which is not always the case. In many large jurisdictions, over half of all cases are “disposed of.”

That's "at arraignment." Most of the defendants that I've ever seen who took more than six minutes were busy talking themselves into trouble at the podium. It really doesn't take that long to tell a defendant their charges, ask how they want to plead, and make a deal with the prosecutor on a bail amount.
johnwilliamson062 said:
Court-appointed attorney failed to appear, but not necessarily a public defender. The article says that "Brad Junge" failed to appear, and I found a "Law Offices of Brad Junge" online. That said, he might have a PD contract in addition to private practice. If he does, though, he's a PD with 20+ years experience, from what I've been able to tell.
 
Spats McGee said:
..I hardly think that's the case for "most jurisdictions." Both prosecutors' offices and public defender's offices are popular places to work with newly-minted attorneys because they can rack up a lot of trial experience in a short time. That said, there are lots of public defenders who have made a career in those offices. Don't misunderstand me: Public defenders are undoubtedly overworked. That doesn't make them incompetent, though. In spite of the names their own clients call them, most of the PDs I've ever dealt with have been skilled and knowledgeable advocates....
Thanks for that dose of reality.

For any activity in which humans are involved there will be stories of failures or errors or incompetence. Folks seem to find those sorts of stories more interesting than stories about the competent, diligent professionals working hard to do their best every day. Folks seem to be much more interested in the train wreck than the train which arrives on schedule and without drama at its destination, although the latter event is much more common than the former.
 
Last edited:
I will add this: While I disagree with johnwilliamson062's statement of the PD system, his perception of it is not uncommon. PDs have a thankless job. Their clients are never happy, in spite of the fact that their services are provided at no cost. PD clients are frequently unhappy, and it's not always because the PD bungled their case. They are unhappy, even if they win their case. More often than not, they're unhappy with how the PD tried their case, regardless of whether they have won or lost. Maybe the client "didn't get" to testify, or the PD didn't use whatever magic piece of evidence that the client brought to court, or didn't show that the arresting officer is a big, fat liar, like the client wanted. The PD with whom I work regularly has about 13-15 years of experience, and still regularly gets called "the Public Pretender," or other such nonsense.

I don't know about other jurisdictions, but around here PDs are assigned to a given court. They don't (usually) run from court to court, chasing cases. So for the PD in "my" court, the reality for him is that he works in the same court, seeing the same criminal charges (and frequently the same defendants), over and over again. He doesn't file discovery motions, in part*, because he sees the same paperwork, and the same evidence, over and over. Give him 5 minutes with his client and a "DWI pack" (paperwork), and he can tell you if the case is a winner, a loser, or borderline. In those respects, I suspect that he's typical of PDs in many courts.

(* = He also doesn't file discovery motions because he and I came to an agreement on discovery years ago that doesn't require either of us to file motions.)
 
jmr40 said:
We had a murder case here back in 2004 involving a love triangle. The murderer was picked up just over 24 hours later and confessed. The "Widow" was suspected of being involved but there was not a bit of evidence. They let both of them sit in jail for 4-5 years with no trial before the guy would agree to a deal to testify against his former lover.
They spent 4 or 5 years in jail with no trial? Is this a typo or is something like this possible?
 
They spent 4 or 5 years in jail with no trial? Is this a typo or is something like this possible?

While things like this are not normal I don’t think they’re totally unheard of. I seem to remember a guy who spent three years in jail in New York City for stealing a backpack. He continued to claim he was innocent and refused numerous deals. The charges were eventually dropped and the guy was released. However, not long after that he committed suicide and family stated it was his experience with the arrest that led to his decision to kill himself.
 
I'm on the prosecution side of the aisle (appellate level) and have watched hundreds of trials, most by public defenders. They are almost always competent or better. In fact, we have former trial level public defenders on our staff. Don't get me wrong, I sometimes have issues with public defenders (mostly those at either the appellate or post-conviction stages) but that's the nature of the adversarial process.

The statute of limitations will vary from state to state. In my state there is no statute of limitations for felonies and I have handled cases involving crimes over 30 years old before charges were filed. The constitutional right to a speedy trial is most often, but not always, in play when a charged defendant is in custody. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that anything over a year in such circumstances is presumptively unconstitutional. Other factors may mitigate otherwise -- complexity of the case or delays attributed to the defense, for example.

JohnWilliamson062 said:
In the county I am from the public defenders are actually employees of the prosecutors office.
I obviously don't know your county of residence but assume you live in Florida by your post. I would be very much surprised to learn that public defenders are actually employees of the prosecutors --- this appears to be an irreconcilable conflict that would put most convictions at risk of being overturned.

I did find this on the website of one of the public defenders:
The Public Defender is an elected constitutional officer of the State of Florida who must be a lawyer and be a member of The Florida Bar for at least five years.
http://www.18thjudicialcircuitpublicdefender.com/what-we-do/. According to that same website, Florida enacted the country's first statewide public defender's office in 1963.
 
I made that come out as an attack on individual PDs when I said they bungled things. I didn't mean it that way. I should have stated the system of public defense or something similar.

I don't see how it matters to a defendant if the attorney is court appointed or a full time PD. Either way, the person is filling the role of his constitutionally guaranteed legal advocate.
500 felonies and 2,225 misdemeanors.
2,725 cases a year.
Lets assume they work 80 hours a week with to weeks vacation and are present and working on their cases 100% of the time they are at work. NO facebook. No travel time. No waiting in the court room for their case to come up. No waiting in between the clients being shuffled in to a meeting. No schmoozing with private practice attorney or prosecutor they want to hire them. Absolute efficiency and everything happens instantly. That is 4000 hours to spend on cases.
That is less than 90 minutes a case.
80 hours a week, especially with 100% efficiency and no delays, isn't sustainable.
What if they only work 60 hours a week? 66 minutes a case.
40 hours a week? 45 minutes a case.
Many public employees actually only have a seven hour work day, 8-4 or 9-5 with an hour for lunch, whats that look like? Just over 35 minutes.
Then consider travel time, waiting time, schmoozing, facebook, federal holidays?
Some of these cases are felony cases. Some of them involve the possibility of life in prison or even the death penalty. A few might even go to trial. Where does that leave the median case? The lesser felonies? 20 minutes? Maybe 25. 10-15 minutes for a misdemeanor?
How can you not think that is a joke?

However, not long after that he committed suicide and family stated it was his experience with the arrest that led to his decision to kill himself.
Procedural delays left him to rot longer than a conviction would. Was unable to re-adjust after release. You may think the delays are insane or impossible, but I am involved in a federal case with AIRTIGHT evidence including a partial confession. 8 months into a projected 18 month wait for a grand jury to give an indictment. And it involves minor victims under 5 years of age. The suspect is not in custody as he has not been indicted. Just walking around doing whatever he wants.

There was another case in Texas recently where a guy was arrested for something like a 2-5 year felony. maybe 5-10. Armed robbery or something. Writer interviewed the PD and a private attorney. Maybe legal aid for the private and I believe the PD was originally assigned the case. Suspect said he was in a city two hours away watching a movie with his girlfriend or something when the crime occurred. The private attorney, or maybe a paralegal/clerk, drives to the city with a list of places the guy was supposedly at when the felony was committed. Movie theater or something has surveillance video of the guy there with his girlfriend right when crime occurred.
PD is very clear in the article. If he is representing the guy he can't do that. He doesn't have a full afternoon to spend on the case or anyone else available to drive to the other city and check it out. He doesn't have any resources to pay for the travel even if he will go at night on his own time. He doesn't make enough he can afford to make the trip out of the kindness of his heart, all his clients make claims like this after all. The only evidence he can submit is the girlfriend's testimony she was with him, and no one will believe her. He will push the guy into a plea deal for a lesser charge and a couple years prison sentence. Totally innocent guy with evidence exonerating him readily available, and he will need to plea to a couple years if ha has a PD. In "5 minutes" the PD decided the case was a loser given his resource constrictions. So much for only needing five minutes.
Why accept that plea as a defendant? The kid in NY who ended up killing himself almost certainly would have been released sooner if he had accepted a plea agreement. Probably in less than a year.
Oh, I found the NY article
Throughout, he insisted on his innocence, refusing several offers from prosecutors to take a plea deal, including one that would have allowed him to be released immediately.
All he had to do was accept a criminal record for life.

Both prosecutors' offices and public defender's offices are popular places to work with newly-minted attorneys because they can rack up a lot of trial experience in a short time.
In fact, we have former trial level public defenders on our staff.
Yeah, they can cut their teeth on the indigent. That is pretty much how it works. Maybe an elected PD at the top or something, but most will be fresh from law school hoping to get moved somewhere else. I know a few medical professionals from Mexico who spent their first year after graduating in remote clinics where there was little to no medical care. Great experience. They even tuned into pretty good doctors. Only a few patients died and they were poor, so who cares? That is what a lot of PD positions are for those filling them. A place to learn and make mistakes where the people suffering the consequences aren't valued by society. In one of the articles I read yesterday a previous PD discussed being hired as a PD a day after passing the BAR. His first week he was given a murder case with life imprisonment as a possibility. With absolutely no experience.

He doesn't file discovery motions, in part*, because he sees the same paperwork, and the same evidence, over and over.
And one of the most important parts of his job is to make sure that same paperwork filed over and over by the bored paper pushers was done correctly. That there were no clerical mistakes, breaks in the chain of custody, etc. That is extremely important and I would never consider a defense where that was not performed to meet minimal standards. I would definitely fire a private attorney in my employ if they said something like that. Something like documentation(or lack there of) of a breathalyzer being correctly calibrated is where those cases are won and lost. If you are poor and have a PD, you just lose.

Like I said before, the PD system is different in almost every states and many states do not even have a statewide system. There are hundreds or even thousands of separate PD systems with a wide variance in competency. Poor areas tend to fare much worse. N.O. is supposed to be especially bad right now b/c they still have pretty extensive economic problems. I imagine Detroit's system is in pretty bad shape. California is supposed to have some of the best.

I'm not saying it is the worst system out there either. Most countries are much worse. Probably a few are a little better also.

And here is the kicker. I don't really care. Not enough to do anything about it. I'm not volunteering any time to the PDs office in my county to pick-up surveillance video of an alibi in Columbus. I'm not writing my congressman asking him to increase resources. I'm not donating even $5 to a legal aid group in my area. Most people don't and that is why it continues. I just think it is a joke and I don't see how anyone could fail to see it as such.
Like FDIC.
 
Last edited:
johnwilliamson062 said:
...Lets assume...
First, you can't base anything on your assumptions. your entire screed is worthless, because you have no reliable, validated data.

You've read a few articles, and made some unvalidated assumptions; and now you think you know something. Phooey.

On the other hand, we've heard from two people who have actual, first hand experience, Spats McGee and KyJim.

Your opinions are not worth my consideration.
 
Back
Top