It’s been 4 months since my last
blog entry. Despite hopes to the
contrary, quarantine is still in effect (although the exact conditions vary,
especially county-to-county; some businesses are opening up, but masks are
generally required). However, there are
some things that transcend quarantine—criminal justice is one of them. As such, I’ve actually had to start going into the office to get work done and even found myself in court. Because court proceedings can only be
suspended for so long, the circuit court has resumed some trials. Last week, I got to see this first-hand: I tried
a case before a jury, but with brand-new social distancing guidelines in place!
Before discussing this
interesting trial experience, there’s something else I want to address. In the past 4 months, in the shadow of COVID-19,
there has been a growing protest movement regarding criminal justice reform, racial
injustice, and police brutality. While
protests of this kind are certainly nothing new, these protests and the
accompanying dialogue have been receiving far more attention on the national
stage than usual—there is a lot of potential for change blowing in the wind. I have my own feelings on this discourse—some
complex and some strong—but such discussions are beyond the scope of this blog,
which is mostly meant for goofy entertainment purposes. As such, I will not go further, but I
encourage any and all readers to look into this further to learn more. Future readers: I recommend looking up “George
Floyd protests” in your search engine of choice to learn about what was going
on in 2020. Current readers: I recommend
going to https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions
to learn more about proposed policies that are being discussed. It’s only part of the discussion, but I feel
that it is a good starting point for laypeople.
(Note: this blog is not financially
associated or otherwise affiliated with Campaign Zero.)
On to the main event: last week
saw me conducting my first jury trial in Tillamook County! I won’t go into too many details of the case,
but it was a 2-count misdemeanor trial: 1 allegation of Menacing (putting one in
fear of imminent serious physical harm) and 1 allegation of Criminal Mischief
in the Second Degree (causing unwanted damage to a motor vehicle, in this case). Because the charges were fairly minor and
there were only 3 witnesses, this kind of case would normally take only 1 day
to resolve. However, the specter of
COVID-19 meant that distancing precautions needed to be taken, which limited
the number of potential jurors that could be questioned. Normally, jury selection (something I have
never done without a supervising attorney before) involves questioning 45 or so
jurors at once spread throughout the courtroom.
With social distancing guidelines in place (which also required that everyone—jurors,
lawyers, witnesses, and judge—wear masks for face shields), we could only have
15 at a time. This doubled the length of
jury selection and caused the trial to go into 2 days (also a first for me). This let me dust off my (very rusty,
2-years-unused) voir dire skills and use/practice them not once, but twice. Truth be told, it was a tough crowd; my
friendly lighthearted approach that I developed in Salem, Oregon didn’t garner
much positive response with the first pool, so I changed my tactics to be short
and direct for the second pool (something to remember in the future with
Tillamook juries). Jury selection aside,
the trial mostly went on as smoothly as I could hope. I kept my opening statement short, defanged
potentially harmful testimony through cross-examinations and hearsay
objections, made appropriate motions for judgment of acquittal (which were
denied, as usual), let my client tell his story through direct examination
(while also trying to mitigate the harm caused by him more or less admitting to
criminal action—quick tip: when on trial for menacing, assault, or something
similar, don’t tell a jury “I would have shot him if I was carrying” or “at
that point, I wanted to break his windows and drag him outside”), and delivered
closing arguments that were rather eloquent (for me, at any rate). When all was said and done, it was time for
jury deliberation. My heart pounding,
and with little else to immediately do, I hit up the local Starbucks, grabbed
some goodies, and came back to court to wait.
I had been sitting in the
courthouse lobby for only about 5 minutes when I received a call that the jury
had reached a verdict. Once everyone was
back in the courtroom and the verdict forms were in the hands of the judge, the
verdict was read. On the charge of
Menacing, my client was found guilty.
Based on comments he had made on the stand, I wasn’t too surprised. What did surprise me a little (though not
that much, based on how many juries operate) was that he was found not guilty
of Criminal Mischief in the Second Degree.
My client and I wanting to strike while the iron was hot, we asked to
move into sentencing immediately. I
requested that the court release my client on credit for time served, as he had
already been imprisoned for several months and did not pose a threat to
others. Conversely, the state argued
that my client was dangerously delusional and requested 3 years probation with
6 months incarceration. My client
explained to the court that he was perfectly sane, harmless, and planning to
leave the state…and then proceeded to shoot our case in the foot by saying that he
was moving in with his friend Kim Kardashian, whom he claimed had been in court January on his behalf (note: she wasn’t).
Ultimately, the judge determined that probation would serve little purpose
and that a flat jail sentence was in order.
She sentenced my client to 9 months, and the case was over. Still, there was one bright spot that pleased
me and my client; since he was acquitted of the criminal mischief charge, there
was no financial restitution or obligation to pay.
Ultimately, I feel the trial
mostly went well, given the facts I was working with and my relative inexperience. It certainly feels weird to jump into the deep end after several months of isolation, but everything feels a little weird in this line of work. The social distancing aspect was an
interesting twist (and it was kind of amusing to see everyone wearing masks), but
it ultimately didn’t factor into things too much (although I did raise some
objections to get witnesses to remove their masks so that the jury could assess
credibility). Another interesting twist
was that the case was prosecuted by a certified law clerk (albeit with a supervising
prosecutor). As a former law clerk
myself, I got a little wistful. Two
years ago, I was sitting with a supervising attorney and trying my first
cases. Two years later, I’m on my own,
handling cases like a professional. Time
really does fly…
Anyway, I’ll need to work on my
voir dire skills, but it’s reassuring to see that I still have most of my trial
skills on hand…which I’ll be needing again soon, as my next jury trial is set
for this week! Back into the fray!
