home
Sen. Larry Craig: Court Denies Plea Withdrawal | 23 comments (23 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I don't like (none / 0) (#4)
by Deconstructionist on Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 03:32:48 PM EST
the way the court made such a conclusory finding that simply circling "am not represented by counsel" constitutes advisement and waiver of the right to counsel, but considering the way Craig's brief  just barely broached the issue  it's maybe not surprising the court paid the issue little mind.

  I assume decisions by this level of court have no precedential value in Minnesota (Is it Eric who is from there? Can you confirm?) and I still think the lack of advisement and waiver of the right to counsel argument could be strong if presented competently.

not precedent (none / 0) (#6)
by eric on Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 03:53:36 PM EST
Correct, this decision would not be precedent for any future case.  One is always free to present a district court order as persuasive if the facts are similar, but that's it.

I don't think Craig really thought the waiver of counsel argument was a winner so that was not a major part of his argument.  I think that is correct, but he really didn't have much to go on outside of that argument, either.  In my view, Judge Porter would have looked to the letters and conversations outside of the plea agreement, along with Craig's background, and found that he was not deprived of his right to counsel.  On the other hand, the waiver is an explicit requirement, if I recall, and it could have been argued a little more fully.  It certainly gets more traction, in my opinion, than attacking the conduct and the disorderly conduct statute.

I am not suprised by the Court's ruling.  Judge Porter did a very good job with the Memorandum, as well.  It shows a reasoned and thorough analysis.  I don't see an appeal coming.

[ Parent ]

Not just "little mind" (none / 0) (#10)
by Beldar on Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 05:31:09 PM EST
The opinion contains no reference at all to Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 15.02 or 15.03. None.

[ Parent ]
The memorandum opinion (none / 0) (#16)
by Deconstructionist on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 07:07:23 AM EST
  does not cite the rules but it does (p. 18) make the finding that he waived the right to counsel by circling "not represented."

 My point is that if Craig had more directly attacked the validity of the waiver on the grounds the record does not establish he was expressly advised of his CONSTITUTIONAL  right to be represented by counsel, the court would likely have not dismissed any such claim in such cursory fashion.

  There is a difference between knowing one is permitted to have counsel and knowing one has a constitutional right to have counsel. Maybe this is an argument that only appeals to criminal defense lawyers but i still feel it was by far his best one and one that was very poorly prsented. (Although I do think it remains preseved for appeal if just barely).

[ Parent ]

I think we agree (none / 0) (#23)
by Beldar on Fri Oct 05, 2007 at 05:20:53 PM EST
Oh, I agree entirely that the 15.02 argument was by far the best argument he had -- much better than anything else he urged.  Given that Judge Porter's opinion doesn't even cite to the rule, however, if he wants to preserve that argument for appeal, he probably needs to move for rehearing in the trial court, specifically urging that argument.  (That's just my guess; I'm not admitted in MN, don't know the state procedural rules or rules for preserving appellate error, but in Texas or federal practice, that's what you'd need to do.)

[ Parent ]

Sen. Larry Craig: Court Denies Plea Withdrawal | 23 comments (23 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft