A Special Note To Florida Criminal Defense Lawyers

This is a departure from my normal material due to the new conflict case system Florida has adopted. There are numerous posts elsewhere about how this will hurt indigent people charged with crimes, so I will not dwell on this important aspect. Instead, we will focus on that subject most lawyers hate: Law office economics.

Florida’s conflict case system was drastically altered to make it more “cost effective.” Many Florida criminal defense lawyers are freaking out because they rely on the conflict system for much of their income. There is now less conflict business at lower rates. Here is how smart lawyers will survive the new system:

1. Raise your fees. A “fee for any budget” price war will cause legal fees to be driven lower and lower – among lower priced criminal defense lawyers, not the best lawyers. Service will immediately decline, and your clients will be the ones who suffer most. FANTASY - "The legal fee doesn't affect the quality of legal service." REALITY - The legal fee directly affects the quality of criminal defense legal service.
2. Get off of the conflict list. The new rates pay less than minimum wage. Taking a case under this new system is tantamount to admitting 3.850 IAC. FANTASY - "The new system will be cost effective." REALITY - Taking cases for less than minimum wage is a 3.850 waiting to happen.
3. Raise your fees. My minimum fee is $5,000.00 – plus costs – for any criminal case, even a misdemeanor. Raising your fees may seem counter intuitive, as there will be more lawyers competing for private practice clients. However, raising your fees will actually work. Remember, your banker will repossess your house and your vehicle, but not your kids. You can’t help your clients if you can’t financially help yourself. FANTASY - "No one can afford high legal fees." REALITY - Some can, those are the ones you want as clients. If you and your secretary give up your salary and benefits, you can provide free legal service - and your clients will get what they pay for.
4. Get Board Certified or get out. In the criminal defense private market, you are either a specialist, or you are competing against one. FANTASY - "I don't need board certification because I am just as good." REALITY - You will get kille din the marketplace unless you are extremely savvy.
5. Raise your fees. Your time spent defending a client’s liberty will never be returned to you at the end of your life. These seconds become minutes. Minutes quickly become hours. Hour after hour, you are quickly approaching the end of your time allotted on this earth. Value your time, and your clients will value you.
6. Never take “payment plans.” You can always spot the “Budget fee, payment plan” criminal defense lawyers. They are routinely late for court, always have schedule conflicts, frequently continue cases in the foolish hope that they will be paid, and they always have the most difficult clients. I have seen them get disbarred. FANTASY - "People need payment plans, they don't have the money." REALITY - If you take payment plans, you will chase clients for fees. They have lenders - with lawyers - who specialize in that. You are a criminal defense lawyer, not an interest free lender.

When you are overloaded with too many clients, too many cases, too little time for yourself and your family, you are hurting your client’s lawyer. Performance suffers, people will get hurt.

FANTASY – “I am a professional, money does not matter.”

REALITY – You can't help your clients with legal matters if you can't help yourself with financial matters.

That's just how it is.

Respectfully submitted,
Stephen G. Cobb
FBN: 0835171

CobbLawFirm.com

Cashing In On Crime: The Dark Ages, Part II

The cornerstone of our current system of justice can be summed up in three words: Crime and Punishment. The focus on crime consists of a focus on guilt or innocence. Everything boils down to the focus of whether someone did something illegal. The focus on punishment consists of what is the proper infliction of suffering for a crime that has been committed. Crime = Punishment.

As any rational person can see, our criminal justice system has utterly failed. Likewise, any rational person would never commit crime because of the punishment, right? This is where the whole system breaks down: The founders of our criminal justice system believed it was rational when it is not.

This is not a minor distinction. This is the key to understanding the stupidity of our criminal justice system. The way we look at our criminal justice system is just as important as what we believe we see. What if our way of thinking were to become Crime Solution instead of Crime and Punishment?

In order to see the problem different, we must know something different. Something that the politicians, the media and the pressure groups want to hide from you: They don’t want you to know why we have crime I n the first place. Knowledge empowers. Belief enslaves. The less you know and the more you think you believe, the easier it is to use tricks of psychology to get your time, your vote and your money.

You have been fed crap and kept in the dark.

A prime example of being fed crap is the current hysteria, sex offenders. MSNBC has a popular series, To Catch a Predator. Here’s their spin:

“An ongoing hidden camera investigation into computer sex predators -- grown men, trolling the Web for young teenagers. This time, police are making arrests.”

Does that pass the smell test? I mean, really, does that sound like MSNBC is interested in solving the problem of sex crimes or that MSNBC is more interested in creating a climate of fear, scandal and higher ratings?

To Catch a Predator preys on your fears, preys on your emotion, preys on your logic and ensures a serious problem is transformed into cheap entertainment. If the show were a factual presentation of methods, techniques and strategies for keeping your family safe, that would be one thing. But it isn’t. To Catch a Predator is all about the chase, the titillation, and the big bust.

Although Doc Block and To Catch a Predator are criminal justice cable crap standouts, MSNBC is not the only offender.

CNN’s Headline News inflicts Nancy Grace upon us nightly.

Cashing in on Crime: The Dark Ages of Criminal Law, Part I

Long ago, during the middle ages, something was against the law simply because the king said so. There were no legislatures, no courts as we understand them today, and no check or balance of any kind. Law created by the Divine Right of Kings – God’s chosen representatives who could make up any law at will. Thus, in France, when a peasant whistled appreciatively at a young French queen, the king had the man imprisoned for life on the spot. This arbitrary system of “justice” was not very popular, and the problem was apparent to the intellectuals of the day: The system of governance was unfair and irrational.

Over the centuries, intellectuals began to postulate a new system of criminal justice as part of a new system of government. They argued that law should be created by group of elected leaders who would represent will of “the people.” They believed a rational group of men could create a rational system of government. Rational law could then be created by a rational representative government. Rational punishment would only occur after a rational legal proceeding with rational checks and balances to ensure the fairness of true justice. Rational people would not want violate laws they had a stake in creating. Some people would break the law, they reasoned, but policing and punishment would round out a fair system

The exact form of government varied – a parliamentary system in Great Britain, a republic in America – but the underlying theories were essentially the same: A democratic republic would produce a rational, fair system of justice.

Over time, the debate has shifted. The founders of our nation are long dead. Our memory of governmental legal abuse is gone. Today, our beliefs are influenced by the media, not a bad memory from the past. Instead of worrying over whether the government can force us to house troops in our homes and horses in our barns, we are whipped into a frenzy over whether the system is fair to the victims.

When you hear that someone has burned crying puppy to death, strangled a pregnant mother, or sodomized a little boy, doesn’t it make you angry? Of course, it does. The media, the politicians and the pressure groups are counting on it – angry people act without thinking. And the politicians, pressure groups and the media don’t ever want you to think, they want you to do something. They want your vote, your time, and your money.

Especially your money.

Cashing in on Crime: Politicians, Pressure Groups and the Media

Each day, you pay about $46.10 for each person incarcerated in a jail or prison. Most of these inmates will be released - and re-arrested.

For those of us who work in the criminal justice system every day, it is reasonably foreseeable that they will violate the law in specific patterns. More importantly, it is actually possible to break the cycle of dysfunctional behavior in about 80 percent of all criminal cases. But this isn’t happening. Instead, your tax dollars are being set on fire by a government that just doesn’t get it. People are being hurt, property is destroyed, and the broken system of criminal justice continues to break the heart of many mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters each and every day.

Here is how the game is played.

Someone gets hurt by a criminal act. Next, the media sensationalizes the case for ratings. In response, the public is angered and afraid. A political pressure group is formed. A politician sees an opportunity, so yet another “get tough on crime” bill is introduced. Other politicians jump on the bandwagon, and a bad law is passed. The result? The problem of crime remains unsolved.

Actually solving the problem of crime is unthinkable to the players in the system. Let’s review the impact of actually solving the problem of crime on the players in the system.
The Media: True crime is one of the most popular news subjects for print, internet, television and radio media. If the problem of crime were to be solved, then the media would lose customers and that means losing money. Watch your local news tonight – it will probably start with the crime report.

The Pressure Groups: Can you imagine MADD’s paid political and administrative operatives disbanding because the problem of driving under the influence was solved? MADD brings in millions of dollars each year, and much of this money goes to pay very good salaries. About 19 cents for every dollar raised goes to for charitable works.

The Politicians: Entrepreneurs exist to make money. Politicians exist to get re-elected. When it is time to place an Intoxalock on a convicted driver’s vehicle, the profit potential for both is staggering. For the entrepreneurs (think ‘donors to you political campaign’), consider this passage:

“In the state of Wisconsin, service centers are getting between $75 and $150 for install, about $20/month to exchange the unit, and $50 to $100 for removal of the unit. That $20/month is just unplugging the thing, shipping it to the leasing company, and plugging in a new one that is supplied by the leasing company. Most states require the user to have this installed for more than one-year on their vehicle. Imagine the potential if you have many people in your area requiring these units!” Click here for the full article.

There is a recurring theme here. Money. Crime is a big business. Crime is a safe business, too. Economy booming? Crime is a great way to make money. Economy crashing? Crime is recession proof, and actually more profitable.

In my next article, we will answer a critical question: How did we end up with this poor performing legal system?

Working Outside of The Box

Another Monday at 10:56 a.m. My first client consult is scheduled to begin in four minutes, and I have been at work, off and on, since about 7:30 a.m.

My next appointment is at 1 p.m., and I have research and writing to finish. My case status staffing was completed a little over an hour ago. No court appearances are scheduled for today. So I put on my headset and begin the first appointment . . . just another day practicing law outside of the box.

Most lawyers get up in the morning, put on the lawyer suit of the day and head to the box, AKA, “the office.” Some have a long commute, some have a short one. Some work for a large firm with a large box, some work in a medium sized box and some have a small box.

The box is filled with people, phone systems, computers, printers, copiers, files, and coffee pots. Whether the law firm is a large box or a small box, most work outside of the courthouse is performed in the box. True, some work is done outside of the box, yet in most firms, 95% of the work is done in the box. The home office is an afterthought for work to be completed after a day in the box, or on weekends.

But I am outside of the box. W-a-a-a-a-a-y outside of the box. Let me explain.

I have been a practicing lawyer since 1989. I am a Board Certified Florida Criminal Trial Law Specialist with a practice limited to Florida criminal law in the state courts. Before 2004, I practiced law like most other lawyers – in the box. After Hurricane Ivan, we realized that our disaster recovery plan was a joke. The hurricane forced us to remake our entire firm, from the legal structure of the law firm right down to how we draft a motion. Later, when the cost of gasoline blew through the roof, we found that our clients preferred our disaster recovery mode of operation. Even the Florida Supreme Court encouraged the use of technology to save energy.

So here is how we practice law at Cobb Criminal Defense Law Firm today, outside of the box:

• We have two offices in two different counties. They are only used to meet with clients. I go into to one or the other office an average of three (3) hours per week.

• Our entire “on payroll” staff telecommutes the majority of the time. Phones are forwarded to a central telecommunications hub, the calendar is kept up to date online, all files are electronically stored in a central location, and we have a system for sending and receiving mail. Out of the box, we are actually more in touch with each other than most law firms.
  

• Most of our “co-workers” are actually outsourced colleagues in various different disciplines necessary to represent our clients. This enables us to build large legal defense teams at a fraction of the cost. We pass those savings on to our clients.
  

• I am writing this article as I normally work on non-court days: Wearing a pair of shorts, a tee shirt and a baseball hat while sitting in my “work” recliner. CNBC is usually on mute, but not today. Stumpy is asleep next to me, curled up in his doggie blanket. My telephone headset is right next to me, and I haven’t bothered to shave. No one on the other end of a phone line is concerned with how I am dressed, rather they are more interested in my experitse, as it should be.
  

• My computer is on my lap with twelve (12) screens across the bottom and six (6) tabs across the top ready for action. I am tied in to my calendar, my e-mail, my research projects, my client files and the courthouse. My tricked-out Gateway Convertible Notebook is a top of the line computer so advanced that I can literally sign documents with a digital pen directly on the screen. My secretary prints the hardcopies and we send what we can electronically to various recipients.
  

• “Box office appointments” or jail visits are scheduled on court days because I am in a suit anyway. When my life revolved around a daily commute to and from the box, I came to hate business attire. Now I enojy it.

The quality of life difference is profound. Our productivity has grown exponentially. Our clients love our service, and the convenience we are able to provide. We have made our technology easy for eveyone to use, and it pays us with more than money, it pays for itself with the most valuable asset one can have - time.

So now it is time to end this break, and get back to work, outside of the box. I will hit the ‘save’ button, open another screen and finish that exciting motion to have Florida's sentencing laws declared unconstitutional based on that Cunningham case from the USSC . . .  .