Should an attorney be disbarred for sleeping A LOT while s/he is defending a capital client?

Question

A capital client is one who has been charged with a crime for which the maximum penalty is a death sentence. As a legal matter, the courts often find that a sleeping defense attorney is not appropriate grounds to grant an appeal from the conviction or sentence, but has the defense attorney failed to meet his/her ethical duty by sleeping during the case? If so, is that ethical lapse sufficient to void three years of schooling, thousands in expense, and the opportunity to have a livelihood in the practice of law?

Answer 1

More important to me is the question of why such a lawyer is defending a capital client in the first place. More disturbing is the possibilty that their clients have been executed because of their incompetence.

Many states have extremely low standards for court appointed capital defense attorneys. Some are trying their first criminal case, some were later suspended or disbarred for a number of serious reasons- including drug addiction, theft and sex offenses. Some were intoxicated at trial. Some had conflicts of interest (in the case of

And you are right, Appeals courts have not ruled that a sleeping or incompetent lawyer is not grounds to grant an appeal or order a new trial.

You can find much more about this problem by visiting the Death Penalty Information Center, particularly the article at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=2131.

Answer 2

Do you really mean "sleeping during the case"? Or sleeping during the TRIAL?

Sleeping during the trial (more than a second or two) should be grounds for an appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel.

And the attorney should be subject to disciplinary action, possibly disbarment if the client was significantly harmed because of the attorney's misconduct.

The ethical rules for attorneys are very strict, and yes, a serious violation is grounds for suspension or disbarment. Sadly, too many violations are ignored or under-punished, which is why many people have such a poor opinion of lawyers.

Answer 3

this would properly be a straightforward criminal seize 22 difficulty. The protection lawyer is there to guarantee the accused gets a honest path and the burden of evidence is squarely on the prosecution. If, for some reason, the prosecution would not run the course particularly, or produce evidence in a criminal way, a to blame individual would go unfastened, optimistic. yet, their rights have been defended. Do i in my opinion AGREE, no, although that's a gadget that tries to guarantee purely the to blame are convicted. the errors for convicting an harmless individual is extra effective than letting a to blame individual go unfastened.

Answer 4

You need to report this person to your state's attorney disciplinary organization.