David Allen Brooks

Thank you very much. Reading this made my day.

Thank you!

??? Not a chance this happened as described, and it seems unlikely that I represented someone in the past who could be this confused. I am very thorough when it comes to any waiver of rights. No attorney can make a client take a deal. An attorney can advise, explain, or suggest. Sometimes we even strongly suggest. We can explain why a particular plea negotiation is a good or a bad idea. There are no rubber hoses involved. Before a deal is accepted a defendant has to prove that it is willing, knowing, and intelligent change of plea or admission. A change of plea has to be done in open court, and isn't accepted by a judge unless the judge thinks that the Defendant appears to know what they are doing. A defendant in a criminal case should NEVER represent themselves, and a Judge will always do whatever they can to reinforce this. Something called a "Farretta Advisement" is done, and it is written in a way that no defendant in their right mind would sign it. I can't recall a client ever soloing, thank heavens. As to the existence of bail, it is either set or isn't (and isn't set in some very specific situations.) There is certainly no reason to make anything up, and the existence or non-existence of bail is certainly a matter of record. What does sometimes happen is that a Judge and DA might be interested in doing what they can to not allow bail, but a bail was previously set "according to schedule" shortly after arrest. When that happens, it can be a bad day to discuss bail since it looks like bail is more likely to go up rather down. The tactics regarding when to argue bail and when to not argue often cause confusion. It is difficult to say who I apparently angered or what the actual source of their unhappiness might be. I will continue to try to offer my clients an understandable explanation of the court process and advance their position so that they get the best outcome possible.