"Case Management" is viewed differently by each of the primary participants in the Criminal Justice System

Good “Case Management” is Essential to Effective Representation

          To introduce the subject of “Case Management” an outline of summary statement of the issues are identified here.

Understanding the Universe of the “Case” to be Managed

Universe of Representation

Models of Representation

Team Concept

The Goal of Dispositional Fairness Concept

      Moving the Dispositional Decision to the Earliest Possible Stage

      Client Must be Prepared for Window of Opportunity

Each of the Triers of Fact

The Importance of Time

      Using Early Litigation

      Utilization of Time

Importance of Evidence

      As Element of Time Goals

For Client Relationship

For the Record

To Sell Mitigation

To Emphasize Cost

Individualizing Systemic Issues

Technology

Importance of Personal Involvement

Management Enhancers

Personal Contacts

Oral Communications

Outside Court

In Court

Communication Techniques

      Telling the “they-lived-happily-ever-after” story.

      Talking about Specifics to Communicate Larger Picture

      Primacy and Recency

          REVO, i.e., Relating Back, the Setup, a Continuum

          Enhancing Client Knowledge Base to Include Reality

The Document Element of Case Management

Dealing with Documents, i.e., Getting Organized to Free Time for Other Necessities

Create a File and Document Numbering System ― Example, a60324

Effectively Using Windows File Folders ―

Contacts          

Letters             

Legal Research          

Timeline          

Inserting Hyperlinks and Bookmarks in Documents

Index to Documents

Paragraph Numbering System

          See the Index that follows for a numbering system example and Index example

Example of the Summary Type of Index

INDEX

Preface

1. Factual Analysis

1.1  Summary of Facts

1.2  The [CLIENT]'s Case 

1.3  [CLIENT'S COUNSEL] Began Representing [CLIENT] 1.4  [CLIENT'S COUNSEL] Filed A Motion To  Withdraw 

1.5  After the Hearing on the Plea Withdrawal, the Court Began A

      Secreted, Ex Parte Investigation

1.6 [CLIENT'S COUNSEL] Next Appeared Before the Court With

       [CLIENT],  Expecting a  a Ruling On His Motion

1.7 [CLIENT'S COUNSEL] Was Held In Contempt

1.8 [CLIENT'S COUNSEL] Had No Opportunity For A Hearing On

      His Contempt and Was Not Afforded and the Contempt Finding

      Was Otherwise Devoid of Protections Afforded by the Local

      Rules, the State Statutes and both the State and Federal

      Constitutions

2.  The Legal Issues

2.1  Sources of Applicable Legal Standards in General in Contempt

      Adjudications

      2.1.1  Overview of these General Legal Standards     

2.1.2  The Local Rule Controlling Contempt Adjudications

2.2  Contempt Adjudication Issues Relevant to this Case 

    2.2.1  The Indirect, Direct and Summary Contempt Issue         

2.2.1.1  Rule of Practice 13.01  

2.2.1.2  Illinois Law  

2.2.1.3  The U. S. Constitution   

2.2.1.4  The Prosecution Should Admit or Deny the Following   

    2.2.2  The Absence of Notice Issue  

2.2.2.1  Rule of Practice 13.00  

2.2.2.2  Illinois Law  

2.2.2.3  The U. S. Constitution     

2.2.2.4  The Prosecution Should Admit or Deny   

    2.2.3  The Hearing Issue  

2.2.3.1  Rule of Practice 13.01  

2.2.3.2  Illinois Law     

2.2.3.3  The U. S. Constitution   

  2.2.4   The Issue of a Jury Trial  

2.2.4.1  Rule of Practice  

2.2.4.2  The U. S. Constitution     

2.2.4.3  The Prosecution Should Admit or Deny.   

    2.2.5  The Excessive, Unjustified and Unauthorized Punishment Issue   

    2.2.6  The Selective Prosecution, Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Issue  

    2.2.7  A Constitutional, Statutory and Commonsensical Analysis of the

            Alleged Contemptuous Act.   

    2.2.8  The Independent Adjudicator and Judicial Misconduct Issue  

2.2.8.1  The Ex Parte Hearing Reason for Another Judge  

2.2.8.2  The Bias or Prejudice Reason for Another Judge  

2.2.8.3  The Rule of Practice 13.01(c)(4) Reason for Another Judge   

    2.2.9  The Prosecutorial Misconduct Issue

2.3  The Duty and Obligation to Disclosure  

  2.3.1  The Constitutional Duty to Disclose  

  2.3.2  Statutory Duty to Disclose     

  2.3.3  Ethical and Expediency Reasons to Disclose

2.4  The Timely Need for and Use of the Disclosure Materials  

  2.4.1  Pre-briefing Disclosure Is Necessary  

  2.4.2  The Disclosure Material Could Be Used For  

            Impeachment   

  2.4.3  The Required Scope of Disclosure  

2.4.3.1  Definitions and Directions  

2.4.3.2  The Following Persons Have Information And  

Therefore Are Covered By This Disclosure  

Request  

2.4.3.3  The Information that is Needed to be Disclosed  

2.4.3.3.1  Materiality of Disclosure Demand

2.4.3.3.2  Disclosure Demand Relating to Possible Misconduct

2.4.3.4  The Method to be Used in Obtaining Disclosure from

      Judge [Circuit Judge]

3.  Conclusion 

Prayer for Relief

ATTACHMENTS     [Note:  All Attachments are omitted from this Example]

Attachment 1                    [Client's Counsel]`s Motion [filed earlier]  

Attachment 2                    Report of Dr. [________]  

Attachment 3                    Transcript of Guilty Plea  

Attachment 4                    Copy of Sentencing Transcript  

Attachment 5                     The following documents  

•   Notice of Appearance;

 •   Notice of Filing; 

 •   Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal In Order To Hear[CLIENT]'s Fitness Petition;

 •   Motion to Stay Mittimus Pending Disposition of [CLIENT]'s Fitness Petition;  •   Affidavit of [CLIENT's mother];

 •   Motion for Fitness Hearing;

 •   Notice of Motion; 

 •   Order Staying the Mittimus; 

 •   Notice of Mittimus;

 •   Affidavit of ____________;

 •   Motion to Attach Affidavit of __________ to Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea;

 •   Memorandum of ____________;

 •   Affidavit of ____________;

 •   Notice of Motion;

 •   Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty; and,

 •   Certificate of ___________.   

Preface

About the Client

Headlines Short Paragraphs

Use Concentric Circle Concept

Include Dragnet Treatment

Including Photos                   SnagIt 8

Writing the Strategic Subpoena

Without presenting evidence, there can be no Action MotionsY2K9. The strategic subpoena is one of the ignition systems necessary for Action Motions Y2K9. Catchy titles for motions, innovative subject matter for motions and even favorable publicity cannot assure the proper ignition for Action Motions Y2K9.

The strategic subpoena begins to tell the story and accomplish the goals. An important element of the strategic subpoena is the production of documents portion of the subpoena.

An example of a request for documents is the following request used in a post-conviction hearing.

ITEMIZED ITEMS SUBPOENAED

1.   All documents relating to the televised CNN Presents segment, “Amazing Grace.” This segment was recorded, in part, in the residence of xxxx on or about February 28, 1994 and was first broadcast on April 9, 1995.

2.  All documents relating to Court TV's involvement in the trial of xxxx.   These include interviews and segments in which you appeared or were depicted between April 7, 1993 and the present.

3.  All documents relating to the WSB-TV newscast which showed you strutting (walking in an animated manner with exaggerated movements of upper and lower extremities) down the hall of the Fulton County Courthouse very soon after the verdict in the trial of xxxx.  

4.  All documents relating to other TV broadcasts, between April 7, 1993 and the present, in which you appeared or were depicted.

5.  All documents in which you appeared and/or were recorded and/or were depicted or described relating to or appearing in radio broadcasts and/or audio recordings, between April 7, 1993 and the present.

6.  All documents in which you appeared or were depicted relating to or appearing in newsprint or other print media, between April 7, 1993 and the present.

7. All documents relating to legal seminars or oral presentations, between April 7, 1993 and the present, in which you participated or presented information.

8.  All documents concerning any communications between you and xx or concerning xx, including, but not limited to, any interactions between you and xx between April 7, 1993 and the present.

9. All documents concerning any communications between you and xx or concerning xx, including, but not limited to, any interactions between you and xx between April 7, 1993 and the present.

10. All documents concerning any communications between you and xx or concerning xx, including, but not limited to, any interactions between you and xx between April 7, 1993 and the present.

11.  All documents concerning personal funds supplied by you to assist in the investigation and/or prosecution of  xxxx.

12.  All documents concerning funds and/or services provided by other than governmental entities for the prosecution and/or investigation of xxxx or any facts relating to the fire at the residence of xxxx.

13.  All documents received by you from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation or other law enforcement agencies relating to the case of State of Georgia v. xxxx.

14.  All documents concerning information relating to the date of any test for accelerants in the residence of xxxx and the date of receipt by the office of the District Attorney of Fulton County of the report for any tests relating to these accelerants.

15.  All documents concerning any compensation, reward or benefit which was provided any persons testifying at the trial of xxxx.

16.  All documents concerning any compensation, reward or benefit provided to any person related to the case of State of Georgia v. xxxx. 17.  All documents concerning the supposed “beatings” Ms. xxxx received at the hands of Mr. xxxx.

18.  All documents concerning other cases on which you worked between the night of April 7, 1993 and the day of closing arguments in the case of State of Georgia v. xxxx.

19.  Copy of your W-2, W-4 and 1099 forms and federal income tax returns for the past four years.

20.  All documents reflecting gifts, contributions, or donations, rewards or awards you have received from April 7, 1993 until the present excepting only gifts from persons related to you by blood or marriage within the 7th Levitical degree.

21.  All documents reflecting gifts, contributions, or donations, rewards or awards you have made from April 7, 1993 until the present excepting only gifts given to persons related to you by blood or marriage within the 7th Levitical degree.

22.  All documents reflecting terms of compensation to you by any entities other than the office of the District Attorney of Fulton County from April 7, 1993 to the present.

23.  All documents relating to any complaints about your conduct as an attorney or about your conduct as a prosecutor in any case during the time you have been employed by the office of the District Attorney of Fulton County.

24.  All documents relating to any application you have made seeking any judicial position during the time you have been employed by the office of the District Attorney of Fulton County.

25.  All documents relating to any application you have made seeking employment within the last five years, including, but not limited to, employment at Georgia State University.

26.  All documents related to classes you have taught or are currently teaching at Georgia State University.  This includes, but is not limited to, lesson plans, course materials, and lecture documents.

27.  All documents you have written about the case of xxxx that are not a part of the official record of this case.

28.  All documents related to written or oral communication with persons who testified during the trial of the case of State of Georgia v. xxxx from April 7, 1993 to the present.

29.  All documents related to written or oral communication with persons about xxxx since April 7, 1993 to the present.

30.  All documents that relate to any justification for you questioning Dr. Joseph Burton about being called “Lying Joe Burton.”

31.  All documents relating to any persons entering the residence of xxxx from April 7, 1993 to the present.

32.  All documents depicting any view of the scene of the residence of xxxx from April 7, 1993 to the present.

33.  All documents depicting any view or reflecting any test, test results, experiment or simulation that in any way relate to the case of the State of Georgia v. xxxx or the fire at the residence of xxxx, including, but not limited to, the video made during the presence of the CNN crew at the residence of xxxxand the test by xx made before the trial of xxxx of the Neat-Lac burning against a board.

The strategic subpoena is most often accompanied with the following attachment that demonstrates to the court the courtesy you are extending to the witness. The following is an example of this type of attachment.

ATTACHMENT 1 to Subpoena

NOTE: Counsel for xxxx are coordinating the subpoenas and documents subpoenaed for the hearing in this case scheduled to begin Thursday, April 11 at 9:00 a.m. through the office of Millard Farmer, P.O. Box 1728, Atlanta, GA 30301, telephone (404) 688-8116; fax: (404) 577-0643.  Someone at this office will be available to discuss your attendance and your production of documents pursuant to this subpoena. Please inform the person answering the phone that you wish to talk with someone about your subpoena for this case. There will be someone available from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.  Persons who are subpoenaed are requested to call as soon as possible with scheduling or document production problems. The purpose of these calls is to arrange for a schedule, not only for attendance, but also a time to produce the subpoenaed documents. The same documents, in some instances, have been subpoenaed from more than one witness. It is not intended that each witness be burdened with production of the documents or items subpoenaed if there can be an agreement as to the person who will supply the document or item subpoenaed.  Persons who wish to be on call for attendance may make this request and everything possible will be done to accommodate both personal and professional obligations and schedules. Please note the time and date on your subpoena; not everyone is subpoenaed for the same time and date. Please call as soon as practical or have your counsel call promptly so that this hearing can be facilitated without a number of people being inconvenienced  by last day and hour requests for accommodations.  It will be difficult to adjust the scheduled time for your appearance close to the hearing date. Please call promptly for the convenience of all involved; however, please understand this requested call is not required by the court.

The strategic subpoena is accompanied by a list of descriptions much the same as descriptions used in notices to produce documents in civil cases.  An example of this attachment of descriptions is as follows.

ATTACHMENT 2 To Subpoena

DEFINITIONS RELATING TO SUBPOENAED ITEMS  

The following definitions are an integral part of these requests for documents and are applicable throughout this request.

"Document", either singular or plural, is defined as any and all originals, or if not available, true copies of all memorandum, reports, appraisals, evaluations, correspondence, receipts, payment vouchers, accounting records and books, communications, interoffice communications, intra-office memorandum, inter-agency communications, electronic recordings including computer generated and/or preserved recordings, video recordings, audio recordings, summaries of conversations, summaries of memorandum of meetings or conferences, list of persons attending meetings or conferences, diaries, records or summaries of interviews, investigation or reports, summaries of negotiations, agreements, contracts, agency rules, agency policies, office manuals, invoices, canceled checks, journals, ledgers, file cards, index cards, indices, deposit slips, data processing cards, computer or business machine printouts, electronic recordings, work papers, statements, financial statements whether audited or unaudited, leases, speeches, information provided to the media, press releases, advertisements, pamphlets, circulars, professional letters, annual and other reports, documents filed with government agencies, reports of experts and research personnel, draft and preliminary copies of any of the foregoing, marginal comments appearing in any document and all other writings and data compilations, including any written, printed, recorded or graphic matter, photographic matter or similar reproductions, however produced or reproduced or tangible things upon which words or phrases are affixed.

The effective use of subpoenas in litigation is a little used skill. The requirement to bring documents aspect of the subpoena should be written much as the concentric statements concept in Action Motions Y2K9.

In fact, the subpoena should be a modified motion. It should command the person being subpoenaed to bring numerous items with him/her to the Action Motions Y2K9 hearing to be used as Energized Evidence.

Sources

Electronic Access to Court Records (Trend)

          PACER  (Federal Courts)

LexisNexis CourtLink

Lexis One (Free, All Jurisdictions, for last 5 years)

Helpful Web Services

GoToMyPC

MyDocsOnline           This is a web based document sharing system

Reasonably Priced Internet Hosts are Available

VoIP

Vonage  http://www.vonage.com/

Helpful Newsletters about Computer Issues

Subscribe to the Langa List newsletter (free)

WOODY's OFFICE WATCH (free, also consider his other free letters)

Karen (Free tools plus newsletter by best computer writer)

Scot's Newsletter

Computer Equipment How to purchase equipment at the best price

Froogle

Pricewatch

CNET Shopper

Scanners

Xerox DocuMate 272

OCR Software

ScanSoft OmniPage 15

ACTION MOTIONS PLUS Y2K9

The Introduction

Motions, too frequently, are treated as a mere procedural routine. For a skilled advocate, motions represent an invaluable opportunity to expose and challenge many factors, both legal and extralegal, while pursuing the goals of the chosen model of representation.

Action Motions Y2K9 are intertwined with an underlying strategy of representation, a strategy constructed by combining, in various degrees, persuasion, legalistic reasoning, influence and conflictineering. We identified four basic skills of advocates with descriptions of these skills in the Models of Representation section.

http://www.goextranet.net/Seminars/Models/OverviewAll.htm

We summarize these skills here with the icons we associated with each of these skills.

In practice, each of these three systems is most frequently combined with another of the systems. Once the representation ends, it is difficult to determine, which of the system was most responsible for results.

     Visit the material on the Internet for a detail explanation of the following indexed sections.

     To enter the website go to the following site.

http://www.millardfarmer.com

          After reaching either of the above websites, go to the right column of the first row of the website and locate Seminar Materials, then proceed as follows.

(Under the top right column heading) Seminar Materials

                                                                                                          (Click on)    Ohio 2006

          After clicking on Ohio 2006, you should reach the page asking for your Username and Password. Use the following username and password.

          Username       Ohio

          Password        Seminar

          If you cannot negotiate the Login screen, it is probably because you do not have java scripts enabled on your computer. As a workaround, you can either install download java at

 http://www.java.com/en/download/windows_automatic.jsp

or you can  insert the following URL and enter the website.

 http://www.goextranet.net/Seminars/Ohio06/AgendaAll.html

          If you encounter additional troubles, feel free to call 404 688-8116 or e-mail  millardfarmer@millardfarmer.com

The Black Hole of Litigation, the Death Penalty U.S.A., differs only slightly in characteristics from the scientific black hole.

The Black Hole of Litigation

Getting Out and Staying Out In litigation where the accused person is eligible for the death penalty and the government’s desire for death as punishment is not derailed, the litigants at some phase of the litigation will enter into the Black Hole of Litigation.

     Not so different in effect from the term “black hole”, which is use by the scientific and sci-fi community, the Black Hole of Litigation is best identified as the point in time when the gravitational pull of human decency, rationality, appropriate criminal justice goals and constitutionally mandated protections succumb to mob mentality, motivated by such indistinguishable factors as political opportunism, vengeance, machismo, insecurity and irrationality.

     The motivations and causes of the gravitational pull of the Black Hole of Litigation, while easily identifiable in retrospect, are difficult for even some seasoned litigators to foresee, as the motivations are deceptively associated with conduct justified by such clichés as “only following the law”, “doing my duty”, “adhering to my oath of office”, “fulfilling my duty to the people who elected me”, “protecting the people of this community”, “crime deterrence”, “victim impact evidence” and “state’s right to a fair trial” that litigants are well within the Black Hole of Litigation before they determine the accurate reasons that their compass of good judgment is no longer effective in making sound litigation decisions about the predictability of the government actors involved in the killing process.

     Recognizing the motivations for the gravitational pull that bring a litigant and the litigant’s support team into the Black Hole of Litigation is relevant in developing ways of getting out and staying out of the Black Hole of Litigation. While recognizing motivations are relevant, this skill alone adds little to either the prevention or recovery process.

     With our present understanding of human behavior, these ill-formed motivations of persons who become governmental actors as their way to survive in life cannot be changed. While unchangeable, there is much that can be done to minimize the consequences of these actions and even more to minimize the compensation these governmental actors receive for their conduct. Is the Black Hole of Litigation just another Cliché to be used by Frustrated Death Penalty Defense Advocates or is it a Definable, Sui Juris Phenomenon with which we must deal?

     For over a quarter of a century we have heard such clichés as the “Death Penalty is a part of the Political Process.” While relevant, the recognition of this fact is only one of the numerous relevant ingredients to understanding the decision making process of governmental actors.

     It did not take a social scientist to proclaim that the South is “the buckle of the death belt.” This statement also speaks to a relevant consideration. Primarily, it speaks to the geographical differences in the number of executions, which account for the fact that in some areas the tasks of advocates is much different and more difficult. Here again, geographic differences in attitudes only offer another ingredient, but not a complete explanation for the motivations of governmental actors.

     To these catch phrase explanations identifying predictable difficulties in death penalty cases, we must now add the Black Hole of Litigation, a more comprehensive and all-encompassing articulation of problems, which face advocates attempting to assist in death penalty litigation The Statutory and Constitutional Scheme for Determining who is Death Eligible is a Graveyard Joke upon Society that Aids in the Creation of the Black Hole of Litigation 

     Guised as constitutional protections, often acting in concert to appease popular opinion, as recorded in public opinion polls, legislative bodies and courts have devised punishment infliction schemes that require the government to prove a “limited” number of aggravating circumstances. As this graveyard joke upon society progresses, the accused is allowed to present any and all mitigating circumstances to triers of fact who are skewed to accept death as punishment as an acceptable societal requirement. While these statutory schemes have presented interesting and defining litigation, they have done little to curtail the government’s application of a false solution to real problems.

     In addition to an elaborate, but meaningless process to access the punishment of death and various requirements for counsel representing persons in death penalty trials, the reality is that most individuals are underrepresented in death penalty cases. In spite of the occasional bone tossed to death penalty litigants, we are left with a death penalty defense system comprised of advocates, who, for the most part, are incapable of getting and staying out of the Black Hole of Litigation.

     Realistically stated, in the early stages of litigation, where there is the greatest opportunity for relief, we have the least skilled, least prepared and least knowledgeable advocates. It is too simplistic to assert that these early stage advocates only need better training and more funding.

     The task of representing persons before conviction and sentencing inflicted upon these advocates is too daunting. Admittedly, better training, more funding, better job security that would minimize obvious conflicts of interest, and more funding will help initial death penalty defense advocates, but each of these qualifiers speaks to the problem rather than a course of action that will provide a workable solution.

A Part of Our Problem that Lands us in the Black Hole of Litigation and Prevents our Return is that we Play the Game of the Government Actors 

The Government, in reality, Selects, or, better stated, Deselects the Advocates for People whom it wishes to Kill for Punishment

Offer of Proof

May I be Heard

Herding Cats

In a sense, this is what we do.