It’s always interesting when two or more legal theories crash into each other in our courtrooms. A death row inmate claims that the State improperly used evidence of his devil worship as punishment evidence.

The Austin American-Statesman reports.

A quick survey of newspapers around the State of Texas reveals a number of domestic violence related stories from over the weekend.

In San Antonio, a domestic violence suspect was shot and killed.  A domestic disturbance near Dallas left two officers dead.

Law enforcement, prosecutors and judges are justifiably on edge when dealing with domestic violence in courts.  Potential punishments for offenders range from the most minor misdemeanors to the most serious felonies.

Many times, I have to explain to my clients that most of them will be viewed as potential future murderers, in the eyes of the system.  No officer, prosecutor or judge wants to be the one that let the murderer go on some previous charge.  Knowing the perspective of the judges and prosecutors helps a person’s lawyer better defend them in court.  The lawyer should also keep updated on what’s playing out in the news, to know when sensitivities are particularly high.

It has been argued before that as our governments (federal, state, and local) decrease our taxes, the governments look to other sources of revenue to keep afloat.  You hear many stories about how fines, now a mainstay in the criminal defense world, were a rarity twenty to thirty years back.  These governments have to get revenue from somewhere, and many times it is through the criminal collections process, civil forfeiture or fines disguised as surcharges, such as DPS’ Driver Responsibility Program.

The perverse structure of Texas forfeiture laws has been documented in this blog (here and here) and elsewhere.  Now, a lawsuit has been filed by the Institue for Justice challenging the system.  We will see how it plays out.

Another example of the revenue generating notions of our legislature at work is chronicled at Grits for Breakfast taking on the DPS Surcharge system.  Those doubting that the surcharge system is both broken and out of control should view this video.

And, finally, we have this story from the Austin American-Statesman about the tiny Texas town of Martindale who was operating outside of the law with regard to traffic tickets and revenues.  Under a 1975 law, a town of less than 5,000 people cannot gain more than thirty percent of its revenue from traffic fines, an anti-speed trap law, if you will.  Martindale was outside the law by a wide margin, and had no idea about the law.  The story is an interesting treatment of the needs of the city for revenue vs. the law in place.  No real mention of how the citizen gets caught in the crunch between the two.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will address whether or not scent lineups are reliable evidence and admissible at trial.

The Austin American-Statesman notes in a story that “scent lineups” are investigative lineups where “dogs sniff crime scene evidence and try to match it to smells obtained from suspects or from items they have touched.”

The story goes on to note, that “[f]rom 1993 to 2009, Pikett and his dogs conducted hundreds of scent lineups for about 20 Texas counties, the Texas Rangers, the state attorney general’s office and federal agencies, including the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration, court documents show.”

The University of Texas is pulling back all students studying abroad in Monterrey, Mexico, and ending its study abroad program there until at least 2011, the Austin American-Statesman reports here.  The story goes on to note: “The move came four days after two Monterrey Tech students were killed in a gunbattle near the school. The March 19 shootings, between Mexican authorities and hitmen, rattled the campus and were followed by a memorial funeral service attended by more than 2,500, according to school officials.”

Anyone who practices criminal law along the border, and even parts further north, can attest to the harrowing state of things on our country’s border.  Border fences, Los Zetas, murders in Juarez, bribed public officials, along with the usual traffic of drugs and immigrants are all part of the daily fare of newspaper readers in these parts. Just this week, it appears a Mexican Military Helicopter may have flown over Zapata County, Texas.  The San Antonio Express-News addresses the systemic failures of Mexico here.

In Padilla v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 opinion that counsel for the defense must warn of the consequences of a plea of guilty for those who may face later deportation proceedings.  The court did not make a ruling as to the prejudice suffered by Mr. Padilla in this specific case, but remanded the case for further proceedings.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/239_drug-case_lawyers_given_potential_basis_for_appeals.html

The Bexar County District Attorney’s office has sent letters to over 230 criminal defense lawyers explaining that drug cases investigated between 2006 and 2009 by the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office may be tainted by perjury and falsified evidence.

I’m not sure what makes a court, appellate court or trial court for that matter, “chronically late,” but the Austin American-Statesman has labeled the Third Court of Appeals just that in an article published today.

The Court, which covers Caldwell, Hays, Burnet, Comal and Travis counties, among others, is chided by the publication for the delay in opinions while noting that “[a]ppellate law is nuanced, subtle, arcane and complex; the workload is heavy.

The article also notes, “Holding individual appellate judges accountable for delays is difficult.  Annual court reports show how many opinions each judge has written, but no tally is kept on how many opinions came from very old cases, and no appellate court discloses whether any justices are running a backlog.”

In this election year, many Bexar County and District Court judges will be brought to task by opponents for docket congestion.  It remains to be seen whether the perceived problem will affect voters who head to the voting booths to decide many of the down-ballot races.  It is my considered opinion that the judges care more about the perceived backlog than the average voter.

In most every new client meeting, I am asked “Do you think my case will actually go to trial?”  I always tell people the same thing:  I have no way of knowing whether or not your case will go to trial, but there are factors which will increase the likelihood.”  I go on to explain my experiences with the particular judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials involved in the client’s case.

I recently came across a report by the Texas Judiciary Committee that sheds more statistical light on criminal trials in Texas in general.  The report is published by the Office of Court Administration.

The blog Grits for Breakfast goes inside the numbers and uncovers some interesting facts about criminal trials in Texas.  The blog notes,

“In district courts, ‘Less than 2 percent of all cases (excluding transfers and motions to revoke probation) went to trial in 2009. Trial rates were significantly higher, however, in capital murder and murder cases, which went to trial in 24.3 percent and 20.2 percent of cases, respectively.’ In county courts, which handle misdemeanors, only one percent of cases went to trial.”

Interesting bit on Wired.com about the potential conflict between body scanners used in airports and legal bans against images of naked children.  Seems like there would be a defense in American law due to the lack of intent on the part of those officially permitted to view the body scans, but interesting friction in two bodies of law, nonetheless.