Alaskablawg

I've Got To Be Moving On

Before proceeding, I want to thank all of you who have commented, emailed, phoned or written to congratulate me for the decision in the Waterman case. It is truly humbling.

This is one of the saddest and yet most exciting posts I have written. For the past several months, I have been doing a lot of soul searching regarding my future. I knew when I took this position that it would be for roughly three years, give or take a few months, maybe a year, on either side.

The reason is that this particular position will ultimately burn out whoever has it. I've written in other posts (and I'm too lazy right now to go back through and link to all of them) about what my particular spot requires. I only handle 'A' and 'Unclassified' felonies throughout the State of Alaska. This effectively means that I only do murder, rape and robbery cases. Further, I travel a great deal. On Monday, I might have a sentencing hearing in Bethel and then on Thursday I would have to fly to Sitka to see a client. So while I do not have a great deal of cases, the ones I have require a great deal of work. The work on each case, the distance between cases, and pressure to get them to trial is extremely wearying (is that even a word? I don't know, but it works).

To give an example, I got the hung jury in the Waterman case on 2/14/06. On 2/15/06, I had a trial call for a sexual assault case set to start on 2/21. I had another attorney in my office request a brief continuance, roughly a couple of moths or so, because I had been in trial on two huge murder cases from roughly October through the middle of February. The judge was extremely irritated. He postponed the trial one week (the week I was scheduled to be out of town) and said that my office needed to find someone who could handle the cases.

Brief aside here: why do judges get irritated at the lawyers when there are too many cases? Why do they never get irritated at the troopers or the DAs for filing cases? Why do they never appear in front of the legislature and tell them that every time they create new crimes or drastically increase sentences for crimes or add new DAs or troopers without reciprocal funding for public defenders, the legislature is adding to the backlog to the court? Do they think that I don't know that a case needs to be tried? Do they think I like asking to continue a case because I've been in trial so much I need more time?

Ultimately, the case settled for a very good result, obviating a need for trial. Nonetheless, I wish that such an incidence was uncommon, but it's not. I had a trial set to start Monday, but it was moved to mid-May. So now, I have a serial sex assault case and an infanticide in April and a major murder trial in May. I did have an armed robbery trial in May, but that case was taken away from me yesterday because I announced my resignation from OPA.

That's right, I am now officially a short-timer. I talked with the head of my Agency and he was very understanding. For obvious reasons, he asked me to stay through the end of May/beginning of June to cover those pending trials. And I will be able to take some cases with me when I leave.

I'm heading into private practice, hanging out a shingle. I'm going to be renting space from a friend of mine who has his own office, which should minimize expenses and give me a good head start.

Let me be clear, though, it is not only the schedule that prompts me to this decision. After all, I could have transferred within the Agency. I am choosing to go into private practice because I look forward to the freedom that allows. There are some things I want to do that I simply cannot right now. I would like, for example, to get into federal work, taking CJA cases. I am also interested in doing international work, which I cannot do right now. The Waterman case has provided me unprecedented publicity, which means that this is a good time to make this move. I don't want to imply that I am leaving because of the result in Waterman. Rather, as I've been examining options over the past few months, I expected to stay at least through the last two trials I have done. The result in the Waterman case just makes the decision more fortuitous.

I will keep blawgging. In fact, I will be able to blawg from work once I start my firm. The first few months, that may be all that I do. I am really grateful to have had the opportunity to handle this position. It has taught me a great deal and I would like to think I've handled it well. Others can make that decision. For now, though, I know that I need to be moving on.

Great decision

I think that today was the best day of my professional life (at least, so far). I posted below about my recent hung verdict in which the court invited briefing for the MJOA. Today the court issued its decision on the MJOA.

Technically, the court did not grant the MJOA. Noting that 2 jurors had voted to convict, the court held that reasonable people could disagree about the evidence and as such would not grand an MJOA. However, the court reconsidered my motion to suppress my client's statements. Last August, I had conducted an evidentiary hearing to suppress some statements in which my client said she knew about the plot to kill her mother. That motion was denied.

At trial, I attacked the police officers who interrogated my client. I argued that the jury should disregard her statements because they were coerced. The trial court today, based on the evidence at the trial, reconsidered its denial of my motion to suppress. In a decision based extensively on a review of the facts presented at trial and how they contradicted some of the state's assertions at the evidentiary hearing, the court suppressed the statements of my client for a further trial.

I had also moved to dismiss the indictment, since it was based in large part on my client's statements. That motion was denied pre-trial. Today, however, the court granted that motion. Technically, there are no charges pending against my client. There is some other evidence not affected by the court's ruling, so the State can re-indict or the State can appeal the court's ruling. I don't know what the state will do. Since the decision is based so heavily on factual analysis, it would seem that an appellate court would overturn the trial court's decision only if the court is "clearly erroneous", an extremely difficult standard to meet. Further, the main evidence against my client now is the uncorroborated testimony of a co-conspirator, which is legally insufficient to warrant a conviction.

I do not know how everything will turn out, but I do know that the State right now really has no case and they have a very tough row to hoe to get the court's decision overturned. My client is in custody right now, but the bail conditions have been so lowered that it is expected that she should make bail soon. Court TV has a good story and the look on my client's face certainly shows how we view this latest development. I am still in a state of shock over this.

A friend of mine wrote that this job, with its intense battles, provides lows and highs that are simply incomprehensible elsewhere. He compared it to being a jazz musician on heroin - it feels great while you're up there playing, flowing with the music, but the come downs are a son of a bitch. For right now, though, I'm just up there playing, flowing with the music. If I could bottle this feeling, I would make a billion dollars. Of course, I would also be prosecuted by the FDA, DEA, ATF, ANT (Alaska Narcotics Teams) and various other agencies. To protect myself, then, I am afraid that I will not bottle this feeling but will rather selfishly sip it. Sort of like that 2003 Argyle Spirithouse Pinot discussed below.

All Work And No Play Makes Jack A Dull Boy

There were no entries from last week because I got a chance to get away with Alaskawife. While I do love this state and am glad to be here, after the last two trials, I really needed to get away. My parents came up to watch our kids and she and I went Outside, a little bit south of Skelly and E. Spat: Oregon.

We meandered around the coast, returning through the Willamette Valley wine country. Started out in Cannon Beach at this place for a couple of nights. We worked our way down the cost, finding this interesting little nugget. Along the way, we ate good seafood accompanied by fine wines.

The food and wine aspect, though, took a substantial turn for the better when we got to Oregon wine country. We stumbled across this place and visited wineries throughout the region. We also ate at two outstanding restaurants: Joel Palmer House and the Painted Lady. Both of them were outstanding. It is hard to describe one as 'better' than the other because they were markedly different. The Palmer House focused on wild mushrooms, which I absolutely love. Served with good local pinot-noir, they were truly outstanding. The Painted Lady, though, was more of a Thomas-Keller-inspired restaurant featuring American regional cuisine.

The wines were also fantastic. I really decided on doing this when drinking that Argyle pinot while in Juneau in trial. So, naturally, I had to go to the Argyle winery. I also hit a few others, including Domaine Drouhin and Rex Hill, bringing back several bottles. The wine that really stood out, though, was Argyle's 2003 Spirithouse Pinot. I ordered a case, although I haven't received it yet. I think it will age some and go well with good Alaskan food, such as grilled salmon or a grilled caribou tenderloin with wild mushrooms and polenta. (Okay, so the polenta's not really Alaskan, but it would go well with the caribou tenderloin and wild mushrooms.)

We had hotel reservations for the first night of our trip. After that, we sort of wandered to wherever we felt like going. If we wanted to sleep in, we did. If we wanted to get up and see sights, shop, or whatever, we did. I replenished some (certainly not all) of the marital capital that the last couple of trials have depleted. Actually, I think before this trip, my marital capital required Overdraft Protection.

This job will chew you up and spit you out if you don't watch out. Be jealous of your time because you cannot give all of it to this job. I recently lamented a good friend, Bill Bryson, who was once encouraged by a court to take care of himself as well as he took care of his clients. There's no substitute for time off. It re-charged my batteries.