Pro-Se News & Views 2008

Click headline for full story

December 2008

MINNESOTA

Taking a curse to court

Minnesota's federal courts tackle cases filed without attorneys -- even ones citing voodoo.

By James Walsh, Star Tribune

12-27-08 -- Mary Nabila Muma did not know where to turn. She believed a woman was using voodoo to steal her husband and ruin her life. . . .  "I am praying that God will use you to wipe my tears which I had [shed] for 6 years now. It is out of frustration and desperation that I file this case," says her lawsuit, filed in federal court. . . .  Over the past several years, Muma has spent thousands of dollars on her wandering ex-husband. She said he claims not to know her now because he is under the love spell of another woman. Muma, a devoutly religious woman, said she prayed for an answer. God told her to seek justice in court. . . . So Muma now prays that a federal judge will come to her rescue. . . . What, exactly, can a judge do in her case? For starters, she said, the judge could deport the other woman to Cameroon. Then the judge could put her ex-husband in jail. . . . "I am ready for him to go to jail," Muma said. "Then this girl will stop the voodoo and he can come back to normal." . . . Muma's admittedly unique case is one of about 300 filed in federal court in Minnesota each year by people who come seeking justice but have no attorney. Not counting suits filed by prison inmates, about 10 percent of the federal caseload involves these "pro se" cases. Chief Judge Michael J. Davis recently started working with the Federal Bar Association to connect these plaintiffs with volunteer attorneys -- or, Davis said, at least to help them better evaluate the merits of their cases. . . . "I want the public to have access to the court," Davis said. "And I want to make sure we have a process for people who are pro se to be able to file their lawsuit."

ARIZONA  

Attorney defending himself skips verdict
Ed Tribble reports KVOA.com,

12-19-08 -- In court Wednesday when a jury came back with their guilty verdict, there was someone important missing: the defendant. . . . In this case Ed Bolding, a longtime lawyer was representing himself against fraud charges and obstruction of justice. Prosecutors say he stole from trust funds he managed. . . . "He's convicted of taking more than $700,000 from clients over a ten year period," says prosecutor Kim Ortiz. . . . A verdict came back on Wednesday, but Bolding was a no-show. . . . "He called his sister and said he was at a hospital. Police confirmed he was at a hospital last night; he wasn't at a hospital this morning. And not in court," Ortiz says. "It says he's guilty." . . . When court resumed on Thursday, nobody knew if he'd be there with an excuse, a doctor's note, anything. Instead as the verdict came down, his chair sat empty. A public defender who had assisted in the case up until now became his attorney of record.

ARKANSAS

Man accused of murdering his brother will act as own attorney

By Tracy M. Neal Staff Writer

12-8-08 -- Jury selection is scheduled to begin today in Joel Bullard's first-degree murder trial with Bullard acting as his own attorney. . . . It's a move Circuit Judge David Clinger warned Bullard against making. Clinger requested Bullard speak with Bentonville attorney Brad Karren after allowing Public Defender Jay Saxton to withdraw from the case. Karren will act as the stand-by counsel for Bullard doing the trial. . . . "I'm not the attorney of record," Karren said. "I will be sitting next to Mr. Bullard, but I'm basically a reference tool." . . . Bullard, 28, of Gravette is accused of killing his brother, whose body was found in a shallow grave in western Benton County in March 2007. If convicted, Bullard faces up to life in prison. . . . Darrell Bullard's remains were found on March 14, 2007, approximately 200 yards behind his stepmother's property at 10526 Georgia Flats Road. Darrell Bullard was last seen in August 2006. . . . Prosecutors believe Joel Bullard killed his brother and buried the body in a shallow grave. . . . Bullard will handle jury selection, opening statements, cross-examining witnesses, calling his own witnesses and making closing statements. . . . Karren also warned Bullard about representing him. . . . Rogers attorney Doug Norwood approached Bullard and offered to represent him for free, Karren said. . . . Bullard believes he's the best person to handle his defense, Karren said. . . .Bullard previously pleaded not guilty to the charge and described the charge as "ridiculous."

TENNESSEE  

State Supreme Court Has "Access To Justice" Initiative
The Chattanoogan

12-5-08 -- Members of the Tennessee Supreme Court on Friday announced a new "Access To Justice" initiative designed to provide legal help to more low-income Tennesseans. . . . Chief Justice Janice Holder said a program coordinator has been named to work with groups on access programs. . . . Also, the state courts website is being updated to provide more public information. . . . Justice Holder said a commission is also being formed to deal with the issue. . . . Here is her address:

ACCESS TO JUSTICE

12-5-08 -- Remarks by Chief Justice Janice M. Holder, Supreme Court of Tennessee  . . . As many of you already know, the Supreme Court of Tennessee has designated access to justice as a strategic priority this year and in the years to come. On behalf of the Supreme Court, I thank you for joining us today. We are here to explain why we are committed to the challenge of providing access to justice to all of Tennesseans and to begin outlining the direction our commitment will take us. . . . I will not repeat all of the statistics in the handout you have before you. But it is no exaggeration to say that low-income Tennesseans have little hope of legal assistance when they encounter civil legal problems. Only one in five income-eligible people will receive the legal help they need. We have 75 very dedicated legal aid attorneys in Tennessee, but they simply are not able to assist all of the many low-income Tennesseans who encounter legal problems on a daily basis. [MORE]

November 2008

NEBRASKA

More Americans serving as their own lawyers

By Margery A. Gibbs, Associated Press

11-25-08 -- When Danielle Nitzel found her three-year-old marriage drawing its last breath in 2004, she couldn't afford the minimum of $1,000 she was told she would need to hire a divorce lawyer. . . . So she did what more and more Americans are doing: She represented herself in court. . . . "I looked online and just tried to figure out how to write out the paperwork," said Nitzel, a nursing student who at the time had little money and a pile of education loans. "I think it cost us $100 to file it ourselves." . . . The number of people serving as their own lawyers is on the rise across the country, and the cases are no longer limited to uncontested divorces and small claims. Even people embroiled in child custody cases, potentially devastating lawsuits and bankruptcies are representing themselves, legal experts say. . . . "It's not just that poor people can't afford lawyers. This is really a middle-class phenomenon," said Sue Talia, a judge from Danville, Calif., and author of "Unbundling Your Divorce: How to Find a Lawyer to Help You Help Yourself." . . . The trend has resulted in court systems clogged with filings from people unfamiliar with legal procedure. Moreover, some of these pro se litigants, as they are known, are making mistakes with expensive and long-lasting consequences — perhaps confirming the old saying that he who represents himself has a fool for a client.

Nebraska Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourt.ne.gov

NEW YORK  

Ex-NY Prosecutor Suing for Discrimination Denied the Latitude Usually Given Pro Se Litigants

New York Lawyer, By Mark Fass, New York Law Journal

11-21-08 -- A federal magistrate judge in Long Island has ruled that a former prosecutor representing herself in a wrongful termination case against Suffolk County does not deserve the usual latitude afforded pro se plaintiffs. . . . Eastern District Magistrate Judge William D. Wall declined in part a motion to compel disclosure filed by plaintiff M. Cameron Kenny 10 months after the end of discovery and four weeks after she took over control of her own case. . . . "Incoming counsel is bound by the actions of his or her predecessor, and 'to hold otherwise would allow parties to create 'good cause' simply by switching counsel,'" Magistrate Judge Wall wrote in Kenny v. County of Suffolk, 05-CV-6112. "Here, the 'incoming counsel' is the plaintiff, who is herself a lawyer. As such, she cannot expect 'the special allowances [courts] sometimes make for pro se litigants.'" . . . Ms. Kenny worked as an assistant district attorney in Suffolk County from 1997 until 2005. She filed the present suit shortly after her dismissal, alleging intentional discrimination, unlawful termination and slander. . . . In her complaint, Ms. Kenny set forth numerous purported examples of "misogyny" and the "conflict between men and women" in the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office during her eight-year tenure. Men received better pay, earlier promotions and more prestigious assignments, she claimed.

NEW JERSEY  

N.J. newspaper can be sued for reporting allegations from lawsuit

By The Associated Press, First Amendment News

11-20-08 -- A state appeals court has ruled that a newspaper can be sued for libel for reporting allegations from a lawsuit before any court proceedings have taken place. . . . The Nov. 12 ruling reversed a lower court decision that dismissed a libel claim against The Record of Bergen County brought by Thomas John Salzano, who alleged the newspaper defamed him in 2006 by reporting a federal bankruptcy court complaint that alleged he misappropriated money from a Newark telecommunications company. . . . The court said in Salzano v. North Jersey Media Group Inc. that The Record was not privileged to “republish alleged defamatory statements within a bankruptcy court complaint” and that the newspaper did not demonstrate the allegations were true or non-defamatory. . . . Salzano, whose father was chief managing officer of the company, represented himself in the appeal. He praised the ruling for “ensuring integrity in reporting while protecting private citizens” from false allegations.

September 2008

WASHINGTON   

Judge Rules for Pro Se Plaintiff in Twin-Taser Civil Rights Suit

By Martha Neil, ABA Journal

9-19-08 -- Reaching a different conclusion than police internal investigators, a federal magistrate judge has ruled that two Tukwila, Wash., officers used excessive force when they simultaneously Tasered a suspect. . . . Siding with pro se plaintiff Terrance Releford, Judge Mary Alice Theiler found that his civil rights were violated in the June 2006 arrest and "also recommended that Releford be provided an attorney to pursue damages against the department," reports the Seattle Times. Although he had a history of arrests and the police found him difficult to deal with, Releford was at least partially cooperative with the officers throughout his arrest on outstanding warrants, Theiler says in a written opinion, pointing out that he initially responded to their orders by putting his hands in the air.

August 2008

CALIFORNIA

Corruption in Santa Cruz Courts

by cheryl 

8-20-08 -- I am six months away from having my J.D., and am involved with a real property case in Santa Cruz, CA, where there are nine easements in dispute. I am a single mother and a hard worker. I am writing this blog because I am absolutely blown away with the level of Judicial Abuse and Unethical Behavior by the Attorneys, even though I am an older law student with a masters in engineering, and have dealth with unethical individuals in the past.

I will be discussing this case on YouTube in a few weeks, and MySpace, but for now this is my story and I am seeking assistance (no solicitations) and I want to education the public about the Santa Cruz Courts.

I have a law suit Santa Cruz County where there are eight easements in dispute, where two of the easements did not have any deeds and two easements are exclusive and my neighbors Niki and Tim Bowden have claimed ownership of my land through these easements. One easement was drafted two months before Haber and Lynch agreed to sell me the property, indicating that even though Haber and Lynch intended to sell me land I cannot use, they failed to disclose this important fact to me. I filed in 2006.

In May of 08, I considered settling with my realtor Alan Melikian and Bailey Property for a small amount of money, because I am a single mom and a law student. However, no settlement was agreed to or reduced to writing. In fact, their attorney Hamerslough never even exchanged documents with me, which is standard, and was a condition stated to Judge Stevens in open court. However, Judge Stevens ruled in favor of attorney Hamerslough's settlement motion without hearing any of the terms of the settlement and without there being a written agreement. A Judge cannot do this!!

A judge can only enforce judicial settlements! This is so against all established laws that it is MIND BOGGLING! I have not accepted any money for settlement, and won’t. I appealed this decision and it was AMAZINGLY denied without an explanation. Now what, fight a case without the realtor as a defendant and then appeal. Alana Melikian and Bailey Properties wanted me to say that I would not talk about this case, even though it is ongoing. However, I said no and am going to "yell" and "scream" about the absolute extraordinary judicial abuse that has taken place in the Santa Cruz Courts, against a pro per litigant. This also tells me that our appellate court does not look at the merits of the cases, but just rubber stamps denial, without extraordinary pressure to do otherwise.

MARYLAND   

High court weighs in, six weeks before trial

Steve Lash, Daily Record Legal Affairs Writer

8-17-08 -- Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, Montgomery County Circuit Judge Durke G. Thompson had to resolve a thorny issue less than six weeks before the scheduled start of the double-murder trial of Anthony Q. Kelly, a non-lawyer who insisted on representing himself. . . . On June 19, the high court ruled 7-2 in Indiana v. Edwards that just because a defendant has been deemed competent to stand trial and assist in his defense does not mean he is competent enough to be his own lawyer. . . . The decision undermined the long-held view that the two standards were the same. Now, trial judges must decide whether a defendant, competent to stand trial, also has the mental capacity to mount his own defense. . . . Thompson, in a memorandum opinion, agreed with Kelly that he was competent to defend himself, even though psychiatrists had until last December deemed him not competent to stand trial.

ARKANSAS  

Judge: Defendant can keep representing himself in Benton County case

By Michelle Bradford, Arkansas Democrat Gazette

8-15-08 -- A first degree murder defendant can continue to represent himself in Benton County Circuit Court, although the arrangement is on shaky ground with the judge. Circuit Judge David Clinger on Thursday let Joel Zachery Bullard continue to act as his own attorney although the judge has come close to ending the setup in recent months. . . . Bullard, 28, of Gravette is accused of killing his brother, whose body turned up in March 2007 in a shallow grave in western Benton County. If convicted, he faces up to life in prison. . . . After his August 2007 arrest, Bullard stopped communicating with the Public Defenders’ office, and Clinger in May reluctantly agreed to let him act as his own attorney. . . . Clinger warned Bullard he was about to impede justice after he ignored motions filed by prosecutors and complained in court about “being saddled with” an attorney Clinger assigned to assist him. . . . On Thursday, stand-by counsel Brad Karren persuaded Bullard to withdraw a motion to dismiss his case on the grounds that prosecutors haven’t taken it to trial within the 365 days allotted by law. . . . Bullard initially wouldn’t listen Thursday when prosecutors explained that 222 days have been excluded for matters like a mental evaluation — where Bullard was found fit to proceed — and for evidence testing at the state Crime Laboratory.

TEXAS

Opposition Kills Self-Help Center for Pro Se Filers
Jonathan Fox, Texas Lawyer

8-14-08 -- Bexar County, Texas, commissioners terminated a short-lived program to aid people representing themselves in family law and other matters after an outcry by solos and other lawyers. . . . On Jan. 22, the Bexar County Commissioners Court approved a plan, championed by 407th District Judge Karen H. Pozza and San Antonio Bar Association (SABA) leaders, to fund a self-help center in the law library of the Bexar County Courthouse for pro se filers. . . . The center, which would have offered only limited legal assistance for pro se filers and would not result in the formation of attorney-client relationships, was to be staffed by two attorneys and a clerk and funded by adding $11 to the county's fee for filing a suit. The idea, Pozza says, was to offer basic assistance to the approximately 40 to 50 would-be pro se filers who show up at the courthouse daily, often with incorrect forms downloaded or purchased off the Internet. . . . But the approval of the center led to an uproar among solos and other attorneys who practice family law in Bexar County courts. As a result, on July 22, a 4-1 majority of the commissioners court reversed the earlier vote, ending funding for the program before it began operations and laying off two attorneys and an administrative assistant hired to staff the center, Pozza says.

NEW YORK

Attorney Disciplinary Body Immune From Claims of "Whitewashing," Judge Finds

New York Lawyer, By Daniel Wise, New York Law Journal

8-12-08 -- Southern District Judge Shira Scheindlin last week dismissed six lawsuits filed by pro se litigants claiming the disciplinary committee of the Appellate Division, First Department, had "whitewashed" complaints against lawyers. . . . Judge Scheindlin had previously accepted all six cases as related to a $10-million damages action brought against the committee by a lawyer who claimed she was fired after working for the committee for six years after she alleged her superiors had a "practice" of "whitewashing" complaints against "certain select attorneys." . . . Judge Scheindlin dismissed the six related cases brought by litigants with complaints against their lawyers because the committee, and lawyers working for it, are entitled to immunity.

July 2008

OHIO  

Ohio Judges See More Do-It-Yourself Divorces and System Slowdown

The Associated Press, Law.com

7-22-08 -- With the economy down and the cost of lawyers high, more people are choosing to represent themselves in divorce cases. But legal amateurs who struggle with complicated paperwork are slowing down an already clogged system, some judges say. . . . "It's kind of a nightmare sometimes," said Franklin County, Ohio, Domestic Relations Judge Dana Suzanne Preisse. "You would prefer to have at least one competent attorney on the case. But I understand how some people can't afford it." . . . Christa and Walter Wood recently filed for their dissolution pro se, a Latin term for representing yourself. . . . "When we separated, we wrote out our own agreement and then went to divorcesyourself.com," Christa Wood said. . . . Legal information is widely available in bookstores and on the Internet for couples looking to save money. Legal fees for the simplest dissolution, not involving children, are about $1,000, Columbus, Ohio-area lawyers say. Dissolutions with children start around $1,500.

MINNESOTA

Some litigants seek self-serve justice in court

By Grant Schulte, USA TODAY

7-17-08 -- The busy daily activity in attorney Susan Ledray's two Minneapolis courthouse offices is a mix of custody disputes, divorce battles and other legal problems — all being contested by Minnesotans without lawyers. . . . The Hennepin County Self-Help Center offices she heads, where people seeking to litigate without counsel can get advice and instruction from legal volunteers, draw 50 to 100 people per day, Ledray says. . . . Last year, she says, e-mail, phone and in-person contacts totaled about 43,000, the most since the program began in 1997. . . . "It's incredibly popular," Ledray said. "The public is very, very pleased with this service. It helps them feel empowered." . . . Small-claims courts have long provided a venue for handling civil cases involving modest amounts of money without legal counsel. Now more Americans are handling other kinds of cases, including domestic disputes, divorces and child custody matters, with little or no help from attorneys, say judges, lawyers and studies from the National Center for State Courts compiled by Madelynn Herman.

June 2008

NEW YORK  

Summons drives Wendell Gault to battle for justice
over broken parking

By: Clem Richardson, Daily News

Bachner for News Wendell Gault shows paperwork from dismissing his summons for being parked at expired meter.

6-29-08 --  If you got a parking ticket at meter 324-0188 between December 2007 and while you're reading this, you may have just gotten lucky, courtesy of Wendell Gault. . . . "May" is the operative word here; it all depends on the administrative law judge hearing your case. . . . But there is evidence that you, and dozens if not hundreds of parkers like you, have been scammed by the aforementioned parking meter - evidence provided by Gault, 56, of Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. . . . The meter is in front of the Royal Video rental store at 317 Flatbush Ave., at Seventh Ave. Gault parked there the morning of April 8. He said he dutifully inserted his quarter, only to watch as the meter clicked off his half-hour in seconds and started to blink "FAIL." . . . Gault, a realtor and musician, said he parked in the space anyway because DOT agents have told him many times that you're allowed one hour at one of these defective meters. . . . He returned 20 minutes later to find a $35 ticket on his windshield. . . . Royal Video owner Mary Gidiuli has seen it many times before. . . . "My son and a lot of other customers have gotten tickets at that meter," she said. "It's been like that since we moved here last December. . . . "Every time someone claims the meter is broken, the city denies it."

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court Limits Self-Representation by Mentally Ill Defendants

Lawyers are good for something, it appears.

Tony Mauro, Legal Times

6-20-08 -- The Supreme Court on Thursday said that defendants found mentally competent to stand trial are not necessarily also competent to represent themselves at the trial. As a result, the Court ruled by a 7-2 vote that states may insist that mentally ill defendants be represented by counsel when "they are not competent to conduct trial proceedings by themselves." . . . The decision was one of five issued Thursday, leaving 10 cases outstanding for the Court to hand down next week, which is expected to be the Court's final week before adjourning for the summer. The Court will sit on Monday and another day next week, as yet unspecified. . . . In the case on self-representation, Justice Stephen Breyer said the traditional test for competence to stand trial -- the ability to consult with counsel and to assist in preparing the defense -- does not weigh the additional skills needed to represent oneself. Someone competent to stand trial, Breyer wrote, may nonetheless "be unable to carry out the basic tasks needed to present his own defense without the help of counsel." . . . The ruling came in Indiana v. Edwards, in which Ahmad Edwards, accused of attempted murder in a 1999 department store robbery, seeks to represent himself at trial. Three times he was found incompetent to stand trial, but by 2005, after psychiatric help he was found competent -- and he renewed a request to represent himself. The trial judge said no, but on appeal two Indiana courts said he had a right to represent himself under Supreme Court precedents. . . . Indiana appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing for a standard that would deny self-representation to defendants who "cannot communicate coherently with the court or a jury."

WEST VIRGINIA

Justices vacate default judgment in oil, gas rights dispute

By Steve Korris -Statehouse Bureau

6-13-08 -- William Groves and Harrolyn Groves of Spencer defied courtroom odds by winning a $704,000 judgment without a lawyer, but now the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals tells them they can't collect it. . . . The Justices on June 3 vacated a default judgment that Special Judge Robert Chafin granted against Nitro Energy of Saginaw, Mich., in a dispute over oil and gas rights. . . . Their unsigned opinion left a door open for William Groves and Harrolyn Groves to seek damages from Nitro Energy at trial. . . . "We find nothing in the record to indicate that circumstances have changed since the entry of the default judgment which would impair the plaintiffs' ability to prosecute its claim on the merits," they wrote. . . . The couple filed suit in Roane Circuit Court in 2005, against Roy Hildreth Jr., his company Roy G. Hildreth and Son, Nitro Energy, BNG Producing and Drilling, B&R Construction, Westside Exploration, GMH Gas and Boggs Natural Gas.

TENNESSEE

Scaling the complex court process on one's own behalf takes little money, a lot of grit

By Cindy Wolff, Memphis Commercial Appeal

John Thayer, 74, filed suit against his former employer, American Loan Company, for six days of unpaid wages. Mike Brown/The Commercial Appeal

6-11-08 -- Courtroom doors flap open and closed, lawyers in suits and skirts clatter past the gray-haired man. . . . He arrived about an hour early, paid $5 to park. He scanned a docket sheet for his name, walked to the bench in front of his courtroom and sat clutching a manila folder. . . . For the first time in his 74 years, John Thayer will appear in court, representing himself. . . . He's one of 193 citizens who have filed "pro se" lawsuits in the Civil Division of General Sessions Court this year. Pro se means "for self" in Latin. . . . The pro se lawsuits represent less than 1 percent of the 32,524 cases filed this year, according to the General Sessions Court Clerk's Office. . . . Americans can represent themselves in any court, but it's more common in small claims court, where the stakes aren't so high. People can sue their neighbors, an ex-boyfriend, an ex-friend, a dry cleaner, anyone, as long as it's not for more than $25,000. Some people file a suit over a $40 dispute. . . . "Sometimes it's just the principle of the thing," said General Sessions Judge Betty Thomas Moore. "They want their day in court, but they just don't know how to maneuver inside the system."

COLORADO

An invitation to witness one woman's pursuit of justice

By: Halena Lewis, Halen@axint.net

6-3-08 -- On May 22, 2008, I gave NOTICE to every person and public entity mentioned in my case in Colorado and then some. All were extended an invitation to publicly answer for their actions and inactions. To date, none have answered. Under Chief Justice Mullarkey's leadership, I have been shut out of every avenue for redress, including the appellate process. Therefore, I will be sharing my quest for justice with the public through updates on contacted officials, media, or other public entity's which purport to serve the public and uphold the laws. It will be a public diary showing who was contacted, when they were contacted, and the result. . . . Please join me at www.progressnowaction.org/page/group/OPENCOURT to witness what average people go through in trying to obtain justice and accountability from our elected officials. I am trying to reach all people, but mostly those who think our judiciary works like the law shows on T.V., and, especially those who think the judicial commissions and attorney regulation agency’s are there to protect the public from criminal attorneys and judges.

May 2008

RHODE ISLAND  

Citizens’ Law School begins May 14

5-4-08 -- The Rhode Island Association for Justice — formerly the Rhode Island Trial Lawyers Association — is offering a new session of its popular Citizens’ Law School starting May 14. . . . The program, in its 15th year, is designed to familiarize the public with the civil justice system and provide an opportunity to learn about the practice of law. The Citizens’ Law School deals with topics that affect everyday life; presentations are given by local lawyers and judges. . . . Classes will be held May 14 and 27 and June 2, 10, 16 and 23, from 7 to 8:30 each night. The first class will be held at the Warwick police station at 140 Veterans Memorial Drive. . . . Topics this session will cover medical negligence, landlord-tenant law, issues involving pets and their owners, personal injury, family law and cases involving multiple victims in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks and the Station nightclub fire. . . . Associate Justice Haiganush R. Bedrosian and attorney Joyce A. Faraone will begin the series with a presentation on family law. . . . The cost is $30 for the six classes. Course materials will be provided. The program is available to all Rhode Island residents regardless of age. Applications for the program can be obtained by calling the Rhode Island Association for Justice at (401) 273-8820 or by going online at www.rijustice.org  . . . The Citizen’s Law School is not an accredited law school and will not serve to prepare students to sit for state bar exams.

April 2008

Professor Answers Justice Breyer's Wish for Study on Pro Se

2007 report contradicts belief that defendants are harmed by self-representation; U.S. Supreme Court's Breyer praises work

Alyson M. Palmer, Fulton County Daily Report 

4-7-08 -- Eight years ago, Justice Stephen Breyer of the U.S. Supreme Court put out a call for answers. . . . In a concurring opinion in a case about the right of criminal defendants to represent themselves on appeal, Breyer noted the lack of data on the subject of pro se defendants. . . . The court had declared 25 years before, in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), that defendants had a right to represent themselves at trial. But Breyer noted in his concurrence in Martinez v. Court of Appeals, 528 U.S. 152 (2000), that some judges "closer to the firing line" had expressed some dismay about the practical consequences of allowing defendants to act as their own lawyers. . . . But Breyer added that the court wasn't in a position to reconsider its opinion -- yet. "I have found no empirical research ... that might help determine whether, in general, the right to represent oneself furthers, or inhibits, the Constitution's basic guarantee of fairness." . . . Enter Erica J. Hashimoto, now an assistant professor of law at the University of Georgia. Her study on the subject -- starting off with a reference to Breyer's comments -- came out last year. And if Breyer's remarks last month in another case about pro se defendants are any indication, he's pleased with her work.

WHO NEEDS A LAWYER?
A University of Georgia law professor, Erica J. Hashimoto, studied how well pro se criminal defendants fare in court. Some of the answers were surprising:

• In a sample of large urban counties, 22 percent of represented defendants who went to trial were acquitted on all charges.

• In the same sample, 22 percent of pro se defendants who went to trial were acquitted.

• In a sample of federal cases, 16 percent of represented defendants who went to trial were acquitted.

• In the same group, 7 percent of pro se defendants who went to trial were acquitted.

Defending the Right to Self Representation:
An Empirical Look at the Pro Se Felony Defendant

Erica J. Hashimoto, University of Georgia Law School

UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 06-002
North Carolina Law Review, Forthcoming

Abstract:

Why would a criminal defendant waive the right to counsel and proceed pro se? Conventional wisdom assumes that there is no good reason for a defendant to choose self-representation, and those who make that choice are therefore either mentally ill or foolish. Courtroom proceedings in cases of high-profile pro se defendants like Colin Ferguson and, more recently, Zacarias Moussaoui and John Muhammad, have only increased the dominance of this prevailing view. Even the Supreme Court has assumed that the right to self-representation in practice hurts, rather than helps, criminal defendants. Until now, however, no empirical study has examined the phenomenon of self-representation.

This Article presents the results of the first comprehensive study of pro se felony defendants. The data clearly refute both the assumption that most felony pro se defendants are ill-served by the decision to self-represent and the theory that most pro se defendants suffer from mental illness. Somewhat surprisingly, the evidence establishes that pro se felony defendants in state court do just as well as represented felony defendants, and the vast majority of pro se felony defendants - nearly 80% - displayed no signs of mental illness. The results of the study also provide an alternative explanation for the pro se phenomenon, suggesting that at least some defendants choose self-representation because of legitimate concerns about counsel. In short, the data in this Article expose the fallacy of the prevailing view of pro se felony defendants and demonstrate that the right to self-representation in fact serves a vital role in protecting the rights of criminal defendants. 

Suggested Citation

Hashimoto, Erica J., "Defending the Right to Self Representation: An Empirical Look at the Pro Se Felony Defendant" . North Carolina Law Review, Forthcoming Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=901610

Contact Information

Email address for ERICA J. HASHIMOTO,
University of Georgia Law School, Athens , GA 30602

MONTANA

Ninth Judicial District receives grant for 'self-help law program'

By Melody Martinsen-Choteau Acantha Editor
04-02-08 -- For many people, trying to resolve a legal issue in court - a name change, a landlord-tenant conflict, a divorce - can be a bewildering, expensive experience.

Because of the costs involved, some Montanans try to navigate the justice and district court systems without an attorney - representing themselves or proceeding "pro se" to use the Latin court term. These pro se litigants often go to their local Clerk of Court's or judge's office, seeking help to find the right forms and procedure to follow to rectify their legal problems. . . . Now the Ninth Judicial District Court in Teton, Pondera, Glacier and Toole counties has received a $14,700 grant from the Montana Supreme Court to set up a "self-help law program" making it easier for these litigants to resolve their issues. . . . In January 2007, Montana joined a burgeoning number of states setting up programs to improve access to the judicial system for "self-represented" litigants. The 2007 Legislature approved $505,000 in start-up funding for the Montana Supreme Court to create the state's "Self-Help Law Program.

March 2008

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court Hears Case Involving Mentally Ill Defendants Representing Themselves

Tony Mauro, Legal Times

03-27-08 -- When mentally ill defendants are found competent to stand trial, does that also mean they are competent enough to represent themselves in court? . . . The Supreme Court struggled with that question Wednesday during an oral argument that weighed the Sixth Amendment right to self-representation against a state's interest in not having trials "descend into farce." Along the way, some lawyer jokes were also cracked. . . . The issue in the case Indiana v. Edwards is whether a state may impose a higher standard of competence for self-representation than the fairly minimal test for deciding if a defendant is competent to stand trial. The Indiana Supreme Court ruled that Ahmad Edwards, diagnosed as a schizophrenic, was denied his right to represent himself at a 2005 trial for a department store robbery and shooting. . . . The trial judge had determined that while Edwards met the standard for competence to stand trial -- he understood the proceedings and could assist his lawyer -- he did not have the additional competence to represent himself. . . . Indiana, backed by the Justice Department, argue that in the interest of protecting both the reality and appearance of fairness and dignity of the courts, states should be allowed to set higher standards for self-representation. . . . "If the public sees the spectacle of a mentally ill defendant ... attempt to communicate to the jury on his own in a very delusional way, it really casts the justice system into disrepute," Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Michael Dreeben told the justices.

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

High court to consider self-representation

By Maureen Groppe, Gannett News Service

03-26-08 -- A shoe shoplifting incident that escalated into a lunchtime shooting in downtown Indianapolis nearly a decade ago is now the basis for the Supreme Court to decide how much latitude states have to determine if a defendant is capable of representing himself at trial. . . . The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments Wednesday in an Indiana case in which a Marion County judge decided a defendant with a history of mental illness was competent to stand trial, but not to represent himself as he requested. . . . When Ahmad Edwards appealed his conviction of attempted murder and other charges, the Indiana Supreme Court agreed Edwards had the right to represent himself and reversed his conviction. . . . The Indiana attorney general's office appealed, arguing that allowing mentally impaired defendants to represent themselves undermines fair trials and erodes public confidence in the system. . . . "The consequences often are disastrous for both the defendants and the integrity — not to mention dignity — of the criminal justice system," the Indiana attorney general's office wrote in its brief to the court.

Lawyer Jokes at the Supreme Court

The BLT, DC

03-26-08 -- The Supreme Court seemed in a playful mood this morning as it considered, in the case of Indiana v. Edwards, whether states can set a higher standard for allowing defendants to represent themselves than the standard for determining whether they are competent to stand trial. . . . When Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher suggested a test that would allow judges to bar self-representation for those who "cannot communicate coherently with the court or jury," Justice Antonin Scalia could not resist the bait. Casting his eyes toward the Court's coffered ceiling, Scalia mulled the phrase. "Cannot communicate coherently?... I sometimes think that the lawyers cannot communicate coherently." Ba da boom. Spectators laughed. How often do the justices get to tell lawyer jokes? . . . There was more in this vein throughout the hour. Mark Stancil of Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber argued on behalf of his client Ahmad Edwards that the standard for competency to stand trial should be the same for pro se representation. At one point Stancil noted from the trial transcript that Edwards, a disagnosed schizophrenic, understood what voir dire was, and that he had 10 peremptory challenges.

FEDERAL COURTS

Inmate's Frequent Filings Take On Targets
Ranging From Spitzer to Van Halen

Federal court system records list about 1,500 filings from pro se filer

Janet L. Conley, Fulton County Daily Report 

03-24-08 -- Thirty-nine percent of the 491 cases filed so far this month in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia have been filed by one man: Jonathan Lee Riches. . . . Among the defendants to his 192 suits are former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer and his wife, Silda; the firms Pepper Hamilton and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; Hooters of America; Norwegian Cruise Lines Inc.; and investment banker Bruce Wasserstein. Riches' celebrity targets include actors Anne Heche, Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones; musicians Cyndi Lauper and Eddie Van Halen; and Braves pitcher Tom Glavine. . . . Riches has alleged that Eliot Spitzer "used the fines [from corporate convictions] to pay for prostitutes," that the MacArthur Foundation froze Riches' inmate account and funneled the money to Spitzer; and that Pepper Hamilton took a $1 million retainer from him and other inmates, but used the money to gamble on the New York Giants. . . . Riches in 2003 pleaded guilty in federal court in Houston to wire fraud and conspiracy counts. His plea, the court's judgment and many other documents in the related suits -- which involved seven other co-defendants -- are sealed. However, an exhibit Riches filed along with one of his suits includes a typewritten page entitled "Related Case Information," which is very different in structure and tone from his usual handwritten pro se filings and may be a page from a court document or other official report.

MARYLAND

Murder Defendant Found Man to Win Case: Himself

High School Dropout Prevails at Pr. George's Trial

By Ruben Castaneda, Washington Post Staff Writer

03-17-08 -- It's an axiom known by every lawyer and judge in every courthouse in the land: A man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client. . . . Try telling that to Harold J. Stewart. . . . Last month, Stewart, a 42-year-old high school dropout, defended himself in a murder case in Prince George's County, where he was accused of beating a sleeping man to death with a baseball bat. . . . The trial lasted three days. Stewart called no witnesses. The jury deliberated less than an hour. . . . The verdict: Not guilty of first-degree murder. Not guilty of second-degree murder. . . . "Everybody told me I was crazy to represent myself," Stewart said in an interview. "I had no choice. They were obstructing my rights." . . . The obstructionists, in Stewart's view, included county prosecutors, the trial judge, the assistant public defender who represented him at his first trial (which ended in a mistrial), the private defense lawyer who represented him between the two trials, jail officials he says unfairly denied him access to the law library and the state Attorney Grievance Commission. . . . "Oh, wow," Montgomery County State's Attorney John McCarthy said when told of the case. McCarthy said he was not aware of a pro se defendant in Montgomery winning an acquittal in a serious felony in his 27 years as a prosecutor there. . . . "We certainly have had pro se defendants win trials on charges like drunk driving or disorderly conduct," McCarthy said. "It's the kind of thing your colleagues generally tease you about." . . . Circuit Court Judge Vincent J. Femia, a judge or prosecutor in Prince George's for 47 years, said he, too, had never heard of such an outcome in a murder case. Regarding the quick acquittal, Femia said, "It would make you wonder about the quality of the case, if a guy who knew nothing about the law could kick your [expletive]." . . . Through his spokesman, State's Attorney Glenn F. Ivey declined to comment on the case. Assistant State's Attorneys Mary K. Brennan and Dorothy Engel, who prosecuted the case, also declined to comment.

MINNESOTA

Site offers legal self-help support

Jennifer Brookens — Sentinel Staff

03-17-08 -- The basics of getting a divorce, making a will or representing yourself in small claims court just got easier with the launch of a self-help Web site provided by the Minnesota Judicial Branch. . . . Workstations are set up at several courthouses statewide, including one at the court administration office in Fairmont. Those with Internet connections also can access the site on their own personal computer. . . . The online self-help center is for people who need to handle a legal problem in Minnesota District Court, and should not be considered a substitute for legal advice. . . . “The site explains some court rules, and makes it more user-friendly by people who are not represented by attorneys,” explained Martin County Court Administrator Connie Belgard. . . . The site offers some of the forms needed, such as divorce with children forms or fee waiver forms. There are also videos and tutorials that show how a court case might play out for things such as divorce or small claims court. The site is also available in Spanish, Hmong and Somali. . . . The courthouse workstations include a printer and a phone that automatically connects to a court support person in Hennepin County. Calls are answered 10 a.m.-3 p.m. Tuesday through Friday. E-mail support is also available. . . . Although court employees are not able to give legal advice, they can assist callers with general questions about court forms, procedures and legal resources.

WEST VIRGINIA

'Hold the cheese' plaintiffs working without attorney

By Cara Bailey -Monongalia Bureau

03-14-08 -- The case of a Clarksburg man suing McDonald's for $10 million after he had an allergic reaction to cheese on his burger is moving forward without an attorney. . . . Jeromy Jackson, his mother Trela Jackson and his friend Andrew Ellifritz now are representing themselves after attorney Timothy Houston was removed from the case, at his request. . . . The case is now scheduled for pre-trial, to be March 28 at the Monongalia County Courthouse in the court of Judge Robert B. Stone. . . . The suit grabbed national headlines in July after Jeromy Jackson, 19 at the time, filed the suit against the fast-food giant, seeking $10 million in punitive damages after he received a burger with cheese, to which he is severely allergic.

January 2008

ARIZONA

Guide available on how to be own attorney

A.J. Flick, Tucson Citizen

01-31-08 -- The Arizona Supreme Court has created an advice booklet for people representing themselves in civil cases. . . . "Guide for Self Represented ('Pro Se' or 'Pro Per') Appellants and Appellees" covers cases, including tax and family law, in Superior Court, the Arizona Court of Appeals and the state Supreme Court. . . . It doesn't cover appeals from city or justice courts. . . . The guide explains how the courts are linked, the steps to filing an appeal, how to write briefs, what costs and attorneys' fees are involved, how to file a petition for review and important terms. . . . As the guide notes, non-lawyers who represent themselves in court are expected to follow the same rules as attorneys. . . . The guide includes some forms as well. . . . Guides are available at www.supreme.state.az.us/appellateguide.htm. For more information, call the clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court at 602-452-3396.

NEW JERSEY

'Ghostwriting' Lawyers Can Remain Cloaked, but Not for Tactical Advantage

Charles Toutant, New Jersey Law Journal

01-29-08 -- A federal magistrate judge's ruling last year that "ghostwriting" pleadings for a pro se litigant violates a lawyer's ethical duty of candor to the court has caused an uproar loud enough to get a New Jersey Supreme Court ethics committee's attention. . . . In a formal opinion meant to calm nerves, the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics says it's ethical, in limited circumstances, for a lawyer to draft pleadings and give other "unbundled" legal assistance to pro se parties without telling the court. . . . Disclosure is not required if the limited assistance is simply an effort to aid someone who is financially unable to secure an attorney or if it is part of a nonprofit program designed to provide legal assistance to people of limited means, the panel said in Opinion 713. . . . But full disclosure is required "where such assistance is a tactic by a lawyer or party to gain advantage in litigation by invoking traditional judicial leniency toward pro se litigants while still reaping the benefits of legal assistance."

CALIFORNIA

Judge Reluctantly Agrees Private Eye Can Be His Own Lawyer in Hollywood Wiretaps Trial

Formerly seen as lawyers' secret weapon to get dirt on famous litigants, Pellicano has been in prison for nearly five years

Linda Deutsch, The Associated Press 

01-11-08 --- A federal judge on Wednesday reluctantly allowed Hollywood private eye Anthony Pellicano to take over as his own lawyer in his trial on charges of illegally wiretapping celebrities. . . . "It is such a bad idea that if the United States Supreme Court did not require me to allow defendants to represent themselves, I would not do it," U.S. District Court Judge Dale S. Fischer warned Pellicano. . . . It was the second time Pellicano has opted to become his own lawyer. He did the same thing a year ago but then rescinded his decision and used the services of attorneys Steven Gruel and Michael Artan, who handled pretrial motions. . . . Pellicano, handcuffed and wearing a green prison jacket, told the judge that he knew that his attorneys worked hard but that he no longer needed their help. . . . Pellicano's lawyers said outside court that his motivation was to save them from having to represent him for free in a long trial after the judge refused to appoint them at court expense.

United Civil Rights Councils of America

"Gender neutral. Child positive. Constitution mandatory."

Click for
10 Main Focus Areas

SEND PRO-SE NEWS RELEASES

VIA EMAIL

Victims-of-Law Open Discussion Click to join victimsoflaw_discuss