Wow! I can hardly believe somebody is advocating pleading guilty!
PLEASE explain the wisdom of doing this to me. It requires that one
waive so many rights, which waivers would have to be later overcome, I
cannot understand why anyone would do that.
Response to all:Ok Froggy! I served 7 years in prison to learn this one. Read Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 or better yet sit in a traffic court and watch how the judge poses certain questions to an accused that wants to enter a guilty plea. Notice first that the accused must have standby counsel to enter a guilty plea. Then the judge must explain all the rights he is waiving but most importantly he must explain the nature and cause of the accusation against the accused. So we can take advantage of this weakness by requesting to enter a plea of guilty. Then they will try to appoint an indigent defender. I interview the defender for 5 minutes and present a contract that no lawyer will ever sign. So it is always back into court and I tell the judge that the defender is insufficient counsel of my choice because he is not licensed and he wont sign my contract. If the judge is upset he will then Bokinize you without any counsel and that is a big reversible error mistake. Read Boykin. If the judge refuses to accept your guilty plea .and he must accept only after he meets the Boykin conditions he will most of the time enter a plea of not guilty on your behalf which you must object to. Usually the Judge and counsel must sign the guilty plea form. Trial without a proper arraignment will win every time on appeal. For general information Boykin contends the post-conviction court erred in denying his petition for relief because there is no record that he was advised of certain constitutional rights as required by Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969). In Boykin, the United States Supreme Court held that it was reversible error for the trial judge to accept petitioners guilty plea without an affirmative showing that it was intelligent and voluntary. Id. at 242. More particularly, Boykin requires that the record must show, or there must be an allegation and evidence which show, that the defendant was informed of, and waived, three specific federal constitutional rights: the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination, right to trial by jury, and the right to confront ones accusers. Id. at 243. The Court made clear, [w]e cannot presume a waiver of these three important federal rights from a silent record. Id. It is not dangerous to try to enter a guilty plea. In fact it is beneficial as on appeal it raises an issue they dont want to address. If you are willing to enter a guilty plea without counsel the judge must identify the jurisdiction as part of the nature and cause. That is where the fun begins. How can he justify a traffic cause a criminal without an injured party, property damage or an international contract in dispute? Shalom-------Original Message-------From: Frog FarmerDate: 12/2/2006 11:44:27 PMSubject: RE: [tips_and_tricks] Trial tomorrow.