- Quickdraw McLaw
- 13 Comments
- 100 Views
- A ruling from Judge August B. Landis of the District of Nevada Bankruptcy Court returns three FM radio stations to a man who lost them in a case over unpaid royalty fees. [RBR]
- CCSD Board to consider $9 million settlement in case involving a special education school bus driver sexually assaulting preschoolers. [RJ].
- A man facing murder charges pleads to voluntary manslaughter in overdose death of 13-year-old girl. [RJ]
- Editorial: investigation of regents’ behavior should be wake up call to Nevada. [Las Vegas Sun]
- Do the regents sound like your kind of fun? They’re hiring a chief of staff and special counsel to the board. [NV Bar]
- Nevada tribes set to gain in opioid settlement. [Nevada Current]
- Anyone watch the bench-bar meeting yesterday?
The 13 year old's case is more than tragic. 30+ year old guy was having sex with a 13 year old and trading it for drugs according to the story and killed her. 7 years is not near enough based on the facts in this case.
Anybody notice that the DA is charging Second Degree Murder in these drug dealing cases but everybody is pleading to involuntary manslaughter? That's because there's a 1983 NSC case that says you can't convict on Second Degree unless the defendant helped administer the drug and was there when it was used. Overcharging so they don't have to go to trial.
There is a 1983 case that interpreted the statute back then. The statute was amended after the 1983 case.
Overcharging and plea-bargaining are the twin evils of the legal system used in civil cases (via the torts pled) as much as in the criminal system. Although academicians have spent their lives arguing the nuances, it can be boiled down to the fact that the "defendants" are put in an unwinnable logical situation.
Except the power disparities in civil v. criminal litigation are immensely different. Plaintiffs versus the state are in completely different stratospheres regarding power and penalties at their disposal. Defendants can utilize litigation mechanisms to shift the risk to plaintiffs; criminal defendants have no such mechanism. I am a civil defense attorney (not ID) and frankly this comparison baffles me.
OP here. Thank you for expanding the point and I agree with you. What I was trying to say, inarticulately, is that even in Civil cases Plaintiff's list tort after tort, e.g., defamation, IIED, intentional interference, etc. when the heart of the matter might be something (in a perfect world) is really just a small dispute over money. Then the Defendant counterclaims for every tort known. It seems to me it is the same kind of reasoning i.e., ask for the world knowing that it may boil down to something else. But your point is great that the disparity between DA and poor litigant is tremendous whereas two civil litigants may have roughly the same resources. PS thanks for intelligent discussion as there is too much name-calling on blogs and it is refreshing to have a fun discussion.
Interesting discussion. A possible solution would be to change our civil system to be more like the european system where the loser pays the winner's attorney fees. I can't imagine that ever happening though. Otherwise, should there be a civil division of the public defender's office and indigents get an attorney provided for them even in civil cases?
Civil lawyer here. As long as courts give prevailing plaintiff's lawyers attorney fees for their entire case, including arguing for their dozen BS claims that everybody knew were either getting dismissed or denied on an MSJ, then plaintiff's lawyers will continue to waste everybody's time asserting stupid causes of action instead of the handful that are really at issue.
Our DA vastly overcharges. It's somewhat sickening to me. While they're trying to twist facts and shoehorn them into the most egregious criminal statute possible, they are screwing up people's lives. For what? The win at all costs culture of the DA's office? If OBC did their actual job, they'd be investigating the DA for prosecutorial misconduct instead of chasing solos over petty complaints filed by disgruntled clients.
This comment comes up constantly from people who either don't know anything about how criminal law works, or are just trying to stoke controversy.
Man takes a gun, points it in a woman's face and says "give me your money." He takes it, then beats her in the face with his gun and tells her he'll kill her children if she testifies against him. No video of the attack, no other witnesses. Victim is in fear of her life and doesn't want to testify. Plea deal is struck.
Now, both ends of the spectrum are angry. How dare the prosecutors offer such a deal, so corrupt. At the same time, look at these corrupt prosecutors, overcharging a crime and then strong-arming this poor defendant take a plea. No matter the outcome, easy for everyone to point a finger at the people trying to help the victims.
This hypothetical lacks sufficient detail to advance your point. Where’s the overcharging?
Discussed at bench bar:
Justice Hardesty and Judge Bell discussed backlog of cases and what they are doing to work through the problem
BOG, NJA, and EJDC each presented proposed changes to ADR rules to the SC. ADKT 575 and ADKT 592
ADKT 592 can be found here:
http://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseView.do?csIID=63267