SethBullock wrote:So here's my lawyer story.
I arrested a guy for DUI. Now, in my state, this triggers two things that move along on their own separate tracks.
DUI is a misdemeanor crime, so the arrest triggers a prosecution for that crime. This adjudication moves along at its own rate, on its own time.
On a separate track, if the arrested driver refused to take a breath test, or if they took the breath test and failed it, our Dept of Motor Vehicles (DMV) will suspend their drivers license for a period of time. They will suspend that license 30 days after the arrest. Now, if the driver wishes to contest the suspension before it takes effect, they are entitled to a hearing with an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who is an employee of the DMV. The driver may be represented by a lawyer, and the arresting officer is sworn and gives testimony. It is very similar to a trial. The probable cause for the stop must be weighed, and the officer must prove that there was probable cause to then make the arrest and request the breath test.
So a couple of weeks after I made the arrest, I received a subpoena to appear at the hearing. So I arrived at the appointed time and place. The driver was not there, but his lawyer was there. (The driver does not have to be present if he has a lawyer there to represent him.) The lawyer was a nice younger fellow in his middle 30s, nicely dressed, and polite and friendly. We introduced ourselves to each other. I'll call him Mr Smith.
He told me, however, that our driver had hired him but that he had not yet received his retainer fee from him, and he wasn't sure he could go through with the hearing. There was about 10 minutes before the hearing was supposed to begin, and he called his secretary on his cell phone.
"Hi Shirley. Hey, has the mail come in yet? Yes, I'll wait."
A minute later ...
"No? OK, thanks."
With 5 minutes to go, he makes another call to his secretary. Same result.
Now it's time for the hearing to begin. The ALJ asks the lawyer if he's ready to proceed. Sheepishly, he explains that he hasn't received his retainer and asks for a delay of about 10 minutes or so. He says his office ought to receive its mail any minute now.
The ALJ replies that his client's hearing is scheduled for the 10:30-noon time slot, and "so it's your time, counselor. We can wait."
So another 10 minutes goes by, and he calls his secretary. The mail hasn't come in yet.
Another 10 or 15 minutes goes by, and he calls his secretary.
"Hi, it's me. Has the mail come in yet? It has? Is that retainer there in the mail?"
Pause while she looks ...
"It isn't? You're sure? Okay. Thanks. Bye."
The ALJ, the lawyer, and I had all been sitting around a table, and so the ALJ had also heard his end of the conversation.
"Well counselor, what do you want to do?", asked the ALJ.
A look of consternation on his face as he thought about it. Then he said with a sigh and sort of a roll of his eyes, "OK, let's go ahead with it."
So, first the police officer gives his testimony, which I did, and answers any questions posed by the ALJ. Then it's the lawyer's turn to question the officer.
This lawyer asked me two questions. Both questions were very intelligent questions that went to the heart of the probable cause for the initial stop. They were good questions. I expected I was in for a very good grilling.
Then he offered a brief argument for the record, and had nothing further.
The ALJ ended the hearing and said that she would render her decision and notify the lawyer and client by mail, as is normal. Hearing closed.
Now we're off the record and the lawyer says to me,
"Officer *****, I just want to say that I appreciated your testimony. I thought you were very honest and professional."
"Well thank you, Mr Smith. I appreciate that. And I thought your questions were really good questions."
"Well", he replied ...
"If that retainer had come in, there would have been a whole lot more of them."
I laughed, he laughed, we shook hands and went our separate ways.
About a week later I received a copy of the ALJ's decision. Suspension upheld.
True story.
Ironically, Smith probably exposed himself to a professional negligence claim. You either do the job properly, or get out of Court entirely.
