Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Docket follow up

See, this is what I like. Comments. Implied criticism. Even anonymous implied criticism. Here's the comment and, below each point, my response (oh, but click here for the post that prompted the comment):

Not sure if its intentional or not, but you forgot to mention to Steve how the State isn't always "prepared" at each setting.

My omissions are always intentional and designed to cover up my own personal and professional failings, which are many. Seriously, just a reminder that this blog doesn't pretend to speak for every ADA or every court. It's about me (isn't everything?!) and my experiences here. I don't pretend to, and never could, speak for my colleagues or the office as a whole.
Disclaimer over, I will agree with you that prosecutors are not always 100 per cent ready. Sometimes we haven't been able to contact the victim, or obtain judgments, or track down a crucial video. When that happens to me, I apologize profusely and try to see what else I can do to help resolve the case the next time around.

I'm sure DAC is an exception and never asks for continuances, ...

That's more like it! Perfection isn't easy, but I strive to do my best. Actually, I have never asked for a trial continuance. Probably out of luck more than anything, but there you have it.

but in other courts, especially the county courts in the very same building, sometimes its the defendant that's begging for a trial and either: 1) the State's not ready or 2) the court's jury trial calendar is so backed up that three and four year old cases are just now coming up for trial.

See disclaimer above about speaking for myself. And I've never practiced in the county courts, I was lucky enough to hop straight into felonies, so I won't even try to explain what's going on there. I will tell you that not a single one of our 300+ cases is anywhere near three years old. I'd bet good money none are two years old, and if they are it's because the defendant went on the lam and not because we haven't been ready to resolve it, through plea or trial.

In the second scenerio [sic], which is incredibly, and criminally some might think, common, the judge and the chief prosecutor in that court deserve most of the blame, it appears.

This just seems odd to me. I don't doubt you because, as I said, I've not practiced in the county courts. But a three year old case? Where the prosecutor is to blame? I'd be very curious to know more about this because in my limited experience, judges like to move their cases along, and prosecutors know that the older a case is, the harder it is to prove. So I'm very interested to hear that there are such old cases in the county courts.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments posted to this blog are NOT the opinion of the Travis County D.A.'s office, under any circumstances. They are only the personal, non-representative opinion of D.A. Confidential if posted under his name.
I welcome all comments, as long as they are expressed with politeness and respect. I will delete all comments that I deem to be personal attacks, or that are posted merely to antagonize or insult.