Bell County Felony Cases

Bell County Misdemeanor Cases

Bell County Juvenile Cases

Subtotal Showing Expenditures and Grants

Grand Totals

* Has a Public Defender’s Office.

This data was obtained from the Task Force On Indigent Defense Public Access Website. The data is available on each county’s “County Data Sheet.”

During the ratification process, however, many of the states were opposed to the new Constitution specifically because it failed to guarantee certain fundamental individual rights.  The Federalists (who were in favor of the Constitution) argued that the Constitution protected individual rights by establishing a limited government.  The Anti-Federalists (who were opposed to the Constitution) argued that if the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had truly cared about protecting individual rights, then they would have spelled out such protections in the Constitution itself.  The Anti-Federalist feared among other things that the new Constitution would create a government which might eventually have too much power and influence over citizens’ lives.

In an effort to gain acceptance and ratification of the new constitution, the First Congress had to promise to make changes which would protect the rights of the citizens.  In 1789, James Madison made good on that promise when he proposed twelve amendments to the Constitution, ten of which were ratified by the end of 1791.  Those ten amendments are known collectively as the United States Bill of Rights.

Among those first ten amendments was a promise by the government to the people that anytime that the power of the government was used to prosecute someone for an alleged crime, the government would treat the accused person fairly. 

Specifically, the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

While this served to protect the citizens against an overly aggressive or out-of-control federal government, there was a question as to whether state governments were also limited by the Sixth Amendment.  Since the majority of criminal prosecutions are brought by state governments, this was a big question.

Finally, in 1963, the United States Supreme Court explained that when the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that a person accused of a crime shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense, that means that all persons accused of a crime must be provided the assistance of an attorney—whether that person can afford to hire an attorney themselves or not—and regardless of whether the case was brought by the federal government or by a state government.  Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. 792 (1963).

In other words, any time the government spends money to prosecute someone for an alleged crime, the government must also be prepared to spend money to guarantee that the accused individual is treated fairly.  That is the fulfillment of a fundamental promise made to us by our Founding Fathers.

Before anyone complains about the cost of indigent defense, perhaps that person should contemplate what type of government we would have without the Sixth Amendment.

The Bell County misdemeanor courts and associated departments are now fully moved into their new building at what the County is calling the Bell County Justice Center.  While it is too early to tell if adding the county departments to the building will mean that justice finally makes an appearance in the Justice Center, it will be welcome news for many now that both the felony and misdemeanor courts are in the same building for the first time in quite a few years.

Instead of the “temporary” courthouse annex on Second Avenue, all of the misdemeanor courts are now next to the district courts.  The physical address for all of the criminal courts is now 1201 Huey Road, Belton, Texas 76513. Here is a Google Map of the entrance from Loop 121 onto Huey Road.  You can click on the link labeled “Directions” to get detailed driving instructions from your location to the new complex:

Once you arrive at the intersection above, you can see the complex over to your left.  The turn onto Huey Road looks like this:

As you can see, the street sign indicates it is the 1200 block of Huey Road (even though Google thinks it is Huey Drive).  It intersects with the 2200 block of Loop 121.

Once you enter onto Huey Road, you’ll drive just a short bit to get to the entrance to the complex. 

The complex now consists of the county and district courts, the county and district prosecutors, the county and district clerks, the Indigent Defense department, the Pretrial Services department, the Bell County Jail, adult probation, and the Justice of the Peace for Precinct One.

There is only one public entrance for the entire building, and there are deputies on duty manning the metal detectors.  Therefore, please leave all of your guns, knives and bombs at home.

I cannot imagine what a nightmare the Justice Complex is going to be on Monday mornings when the parking lot is full of potential jurors, defendants, lawyers and the rest of the public trying to fit through the bottleneck that will undoubtedly occur.  I suppose the lesson is, “be early.”

If you are going to the Bell County Jail, you’ll turn to your right and just keep driving as far as you can.  Eventually you’ll run into the jail.  The entrance is in the corner, and you’ll have to walk a

bit across a little foot bridge to get there.  They have a beautiful round entrance area which you’ll see on your right as you walk by it with the summer sun beating down on you from above, but someone decided to put flag poles right in the middle of the driving surface and then on top of that someone roped off the entrance anyway.  A beautiful and convenient drop-off location blocked off with $3 worth of cheap rope.  That’s classy!

Regardless, the new courthouse complex is fantastic and it looks like a million dollars (though I suppose I should say it looks more like almost $100 million dollars)!  Even though the voters repeatedly voted it down, and even though the public may scream about the expense, I (for one) realize how badly the county needed this expansion.  Also, as a criminal defense attorney I previously spent a good chunk of my day driving back-and-forth between the district and county buildings.  At long last, I have one-stop shopping since the county’s “Justice Complex” is now open for business.  Let’s just hope that not all of that complex justice is out-of-stock.

See you at the new courthouse!

Interesting.  In 2009 – even with the country in a major recession and presumably more Bell County citizens out of work than any of the other years for which data is available – the percentage of defendants with court-appointed attorneys dropped from 82% in 2008 to 55% last year. 

Here’s a bar graph showing the changes:

What’s the reason for the change?  Perhaps you’ll recall an earlier post of mine (“Why high bail amounts cost taxpayers money”).  In that posting I argued that the high preset bail bond amounts imposed by Bell County magistrates result in criminal defendants qualifying for court-appointed attorneys because they’ve spent all of their money on bonding out of jail.

Well, since that post, the new Pretrial Services Office in Bell County has been bonding out more and more criminal defendants on PR Bonds.  So, even though the preset bail bond amounts have not lowered like they should have, it does not matter since PR Bond is getting more and more people out of jail and back to being productive members of society.

With more criminal defendants able to return to work, there have been more retained attorneys.  It’s nice to be vindicated by data.

According to the Texas Office of Court Administration, the Bell County district courts handled a wide variety of criminal cases during the year 2009.  Here is the breakdown of cases as per the OCA:

According to the Texas Office of Court Administration, the Bell County district courts handled 2,283 felony criminal cases during the year 2009. Of those cases, just 10% were cases which were resolved within the first 60 days after the case was filed. Only 7% were completed between 60 and 90 days, and another 6% were completed between 90 and 120 days. The majority of all felony criminal cases, some 77% (almost 8 out of every 10 cases filed), required more than 120 days to resolve.

Statewide, there were a total of 282,897 felony criminal cases resolved in 2009. Overall, almost one out of every three felony criminal cases (or 32%) were resolved within the first 60 days after being filed. There were an additional 9% of cases which were resolved within 60 and 90 days, and another 8% from 90 to 120 days. The remaining 51% of cases took more than 120 days to complete from date of filing to final resolution.

Misdemeanor Cases

According to the Texas Office of Court Administration, the Bell County misdemeanor courts handled 9,010 cases during 2009. Of those, 15% of all misdemeanor cases were resolved within the first 30 days after being filed. However, only 6% were completed between 31 and 60 days, and another 6% between 61 and 90 days. The majority of all misdemeanor criminal cases, some 73% (roughly 8 out of every 10 cases filed), took more than 90 days to resolve.

Statewide, there were 611,694 misdemeanor cases resolved during 2009. Of those, roughly one out of every four misdemeanor criminal cases (or 23%) were resolved within the first 30 days. Next, there were an additional 11% of cases which were resolved within 31 and 60 days, and then another 9% from 61 to 90 days. The remaining 57% took more than 90 days to complete.

You can easily download the app from the iTunes store (or just click here).  Once you install the app, just enter your email address and password which you use to access Ruby already, and voila! You now have easy access to your phone call data and a really quick and easy way to update your status.

The photo above on the right shows you the main screen which opens once the app is started.  It also shows the date and time of the last update.  In this example, it shows that Ruby is following my default call routing instructions.  If you click the button labeled “Special”, you can change those default rules.

This photo on the left shows the screen which then comes up.  From here, you can select the amount of time which the temporary routing instructions should be followed (either “For the Rest of Today”, “Until Further Notice” or until a specific date and time).  Then, you can choose to route the calls during this period of time to any of the phones setup in your plan, or you can select “Message Only”, “Voice Mail or Message”, or “Other.”  If you choose other, you can then explain what that means in the Special Instructions box at the bottom of the form at left.

When you click on the Special Instructions option, a blank white page opens up.  Just touch anywhere on the screen and the keyboard will appear.  If you do not select that option, then no special instructions will be sent.  If your status changes, all of you have to do is go back to the “Whereabouts” screen and look for the button at the top-right which will say “Clear.”  Press that button, and as easy as that, your default call routing rules will be back in use.

The “Activity” button at the bottom of the screen will take you to a report showing all of your activity for a given amount of time.  These are the same reports which are available on the callruby.com website.  This feature is great when you have already deleted an email message, but you need the message again while out-and-about.  Or, it’s also handy for finding that phone number for that great new client who called you last Friday right as you walked in the door and you need to call them right away before you can back to the office.

The “Account” button is where you can change your account information to access Ruby.  Finally, the “Ruby” button will take you to the “About Ruby” screen.  That screen also has a link to a help file to explain the use of the app in more detail.  That page is actually a webpage on Ruby’s website, and you can access it here, if you’re curious.

So, how does it work?  Flawlessly.  I have experimented with the program now for a few weeks and from what I can tell, the program is merely an interface which creates a custom email, which is then sent to the staff at Ruby.  The “Clear” button also simply sends Ruby an email with the subject line “Clear W/A for…” and then it adds your name and account number.

The easiest way to update your status with Ruby prior to this app was to send a quick email with all of your temporary routing rules explained.  What the iPhone app does is that it creates that customized email for you.  It is quick to touch and click a few times and there it is—all of your special call routing instructions sent to Ruby as easy as can be.  It is especially simple to clear those custom routing rules and go back to the default instructions with this iPhone app.

Over the past week I have timed the response times using both traditional email notification and the new iPhone app.  In my test, the average response was about one minute.  The longest response time was three minutes, but that happened only once, and it happened one time for each system.  Therefore, it would appear that the app is just as efficient as a regular email would be at updating your status.  Plus, this iPhone app makes you look super cool when you lean over and explain what you’re doing to the other lawyers in the courtroom!

Overall, it’s a great app and the price is right—free.  If you use Ruby (and I know more and more of you are, because I hear from you all of the time), you need this app.  Also, if you haven’t broken down and bought an iPhone yet—this is the perfect excuse to get one now.  Explain to the significant other that you HAD to get the iPhone so you can use the Ruby app.  If you already have an iPhone, then use this as your excuse to get the new iPad in a few months.  That’s my excuse for getting one!

The numbers from Bell and Lampasas Counties suggest that we need “9.5” district court judicial officers, while we supposedly only have “6.5” (here, page 46).  The explanation for this, according to the report, is that we are among the top twenty or so counties who have the highest average populations served per district court.

The most obvious question, then, is – who is our “.5” judicial officer that we already have?

The next most obvious question is – where are we going to put the three new judges?  The district courthouse is done, and the county is almost finished.  I understand that there will be a couple of extra county courtrooms available.  I don’t suppose there would be any problem with putting a district court on the “county court side” of the new courthouse. 

Or, maybe we could get two more county judges and just give them jurisdiction over all family law cases.  That would certainly free up the district courts!

Even more interesting is that in the Western District of Texas, there were a total of 7,232 convictions.  Of those, 98.7% pled guilty and a mere 1.3% went to trial.

By comparison, in Texas state court 97.3% of felony convictions were the result of a guilty plea and 2.7% of convictions resulted from a trial. 

So why aren’t more federal defendants in this part of Texas going to trial? 

It can’t be because the prosecutors are recommending lower sentences, because they aren’t.  In fact, given that in almost all cases the judges of the Western District sentenced lower than the national average, maybe losing that “acceptance of responsibility” reduction isn’t that big of a deal!

For example, the United States Sentencing Commission publishes quarterly and annual reports on federal sentencing averages.  This is useful information for someone who might be wondering what the average sentence for a federal drug trafficking offense might be (83.2 months nationally, while only 46.5 months in the Western District).

And that leads to an interesting observation:  a defendant in the Western District of Texas is likely to find more mercy from the judge than from the Department of Justice.

In almost every category of offense, the Western District of Texas gives lower average sentences than the rest of the nation (here, page 10).  The four notable exceptions are the offense categories of Embezzlement, Forgery, Bribery, and Tax.

However, where the Western District lags behind the rest of the nation is in government sponsored below range sentences.  Nationally, US Attorneys ask for below range sentences in 25.6% of all cases (that’s one out of four!).  In the Western District, though, the government only seeks reduced sentences in 9.5% of all cases (that’s one out of ten!) (here, page 11).

Nationally, federal judges sentence above the guideline range in 1.5% of all cases, and Western District judges sentence above the guideline range in 1.8% of all cases.

So, for the average defendant in the Western District of Texas, that defendant probably shouldn’t fear the judge – but rather, the prosecutor.

In my experience, a law firm’s receptionist is the single most important employee in the firm.  Sure, a law firm obviously needs lawyers; and those lawyers often need legal assistants, secretaries, bookkeepers, accountants and even office managers.  However, it is the receptionist who greets the firm’s callers.  She, or he, is most often the first person a potential new client talks to.  The receptionist is also the gatekeeper, one who must ensure that only the right calls get through at the right time.

A receptionist can easily make or break a firm.  That is why I have been using Ruby Receptionists for the past few months, and will continue to use them from now on.  Having now completed my second paid month, I wanted to report on my great satisfaction with this fantastic service. 

Ruby is more than just an answering service, they are my receptionists (though it just so happens in this case that my receptionists show up for work in Portland, Oregon).  Ruby answers my phones as if they were actually in my office, though.  In fact, I have found Ruby Receptionists to be so good at their job, that I have forgotten that they were not actually in my office on more than one occasion!  That is why you will see me refer to this wonderful service just simply as “Ruby.”  I have come to think of Ruby as a singular, always present and pleasant employee.

The way it works is explained best on the Ruby Receptionists website.  Basically, though, I forward my incoming phone line to a special toll-free number which Ruby arranged for me.  I could give out this toll-free number, but I already had a toll-free number setup to forward to my incoming main line so I just continue to give that toll-free number out to everyone.

When someone calls my main number the call is automatically forwarded to Ruby’s call center in Portland, Oregon.  Ruby promptly answers the call with a greeting of my choice.  Ruby knows whether I am available or not because I send an email to Ruby anytime my status changes.  Ruby also has a set of default “call handling rules” which I created at the time I started using Ruby.  The rules can be changed at any time, either temporarily or permanently.  All it takes is a quick phone call to my own number to speak with Ruby, or an email to Ruby at any time.

As an aside, I have found that setting up an “auto text” entry in my Blackberry works great for updating Ruby on my status.  I have customized my Blackberry so that I simply have to type #r and then press the space bar on my Blackberry to have it create an email with all of the available status choices already there.  I just delete what does not apply and I am left with a great form email that explains where I will be, for how long, and how to reach me (if I can be, or want to be, reached).

When I am at the office, Ruby calls me on my second phone line (my “Line Two”).  Ruby can not call on Line One, though, because that line is forwarded to Ruby.  I do make my own outgoing calls on Line One, though.  This is so that Line Two will remain available for Ruby to call me.  I am a solo attorney, and I only have two phone lines plus a fax line.  If you only had one phone line, then I suppose you would have to use a cell phone to receive the calls from Ruby.  If you have a good Bluetooth headset, that might not be that bad of an idea, though.

When I am out of the office, Ruby can call my cell phone.  While I usually do not like speaking with clients on my cell phone (since I do not have a client file there in front of me to answer any real questions), it can be useful if I am expecting a particular call or if I have decided to sneak out to do some quick shopping and I would rather not shut the whole office down.  When I am at home, Ruby can call my home phone.

Regardless of where I am, when I answer a call from Ruby a friendly voice identifies herself by name and states that she is a receptionist for Ruby.  She then tells me the name of the caller she has on hold.  While we are discussing who the caller is and why the person is calling (Ruby will ask whatever questions I want Ruby to ask the caller, depending on the type of caller), the caller is listening to pleasant “hold” music.  I mention this only because I’ve had a couple of clients mention it to me.  When was the last time a client commented favorably on your hold music?  Apparently during the holidays, they were treated to some nice seasonal tunes.

If I agree to speak with the caller there is a seamless, noiseless, and instant transfer of the call to me.  Just as soon as Ruby finishes saying “here s/he is”, the caller and I are connected.  If I decide not to take the call, I can direct Ruby to take a message or I can have Ruby deliver a message if the caller just needs an answer to a quick question.  I could also have Ruby forward the caller to my voicemail, but then I’d have to listen to the message and return the call only after doing so.

Of course, oftentimes I am in court and unavailable for almost all calls.  For those situations, Ruby knows to not even bother trying to reach me–that is, unless it is a judge or other court personnel, Ruby will always attempt to track me down for that type of phone call.  That is just one of the many call handling rules I have set up.  If I wanted to have a rule that says a fellow attorney’s calls always get through regardless of any other rule, Ruby can do that (and that actually is one of my handling rules).  The possibilities are endless.

Whenever Ruby takes a message for me, I receive an email from Ruby which provides me with the name of the caller, the caller’s telephone number which the caller provided, the caller’s actual phone number from Caller ID if it is different from what the caller provided, and the message from the caller.  Because the call goes to Ruby over a toll-free number, the number shows up on Caller ID even if the caller tried to block it.  This is a little-known benefit to having a toll-free number.

The email message is also a great written memorialization of the call which can be easily attached to a client’s electronic case file (or printed out and stuck in the client’s file).  Plus, if the caller is asking something I know the answer to, I can simply reply to the email and ask Ruby to call the person back and deliver a response.  What a time saver!  I can not count the number of times I have sat in court waiting for a case to start, and I have used Ruby to satisfy a client’s desire to have an immediate response regarding some simple question.  I have turned what would have been wasted time sitting in a courtroom into productive, and billable, time.

Even better, I can send a list of calls which I would like Ruby to make, and she will.  For example, each time I have a busy court week I email a list of client names, phone numbers, and the corresponding court dates and times.  Ruby then calls each person and reminds them of their upcoming court date and the need to be there.  Once she is done, I get a full report back by email of who answered, who was left a message, and who says they can not show up that day!  I then attach the report to each person’s electronic case file and I then have documentation showing each person’s knowledge regarding the need to be in court.

Probably the greatest benefit of using Ruby is that my clients absolutely love speaking with her!  My callers get a real-live person listening to them, and assisting them with their problems.  In my experience, clients hate leaving voicemail almost as much as I hate listening to it.  Also, my clients usually get a response from me, through Ruby, a heck of a lot faster than they would get if they had to wait until the end of the day for me to check my voicemail or to read a bunch of pink message slips, and then reply.  Even if I do not have the exact answer for a client, a quick return call from Ruby saying that I have acknowledged their inquiry and will expect to have an answer to them at a specific time does wonders for client satisfaction.

In fact, since I started using Ruby, I believe that my clients’ satisfaction with my firm has gone up tremendously.  I hear compliments about Ruby all of the time.  I especially hear compliments from fellow attorneys and judges who love the professionalism Ruby brings to every one of my calls.  So far, only a few fellow attorneys have figured out that Ruby is not actually in my office.  One figured it out because, as he later explained to me, “no receptionist that good would work in a town this small.”

Ruby is also always pleasant, regardless of whatever mood the caller is in.  Of course, Ruby does not hesitate to let me know about a caller’s impatience or bad attitude on the occasion when that happens, but that is exactly what I need to know.  She also puts comments about other impressions she gathers from speaking with the caller, if relevant (i.e. “she seemed anxious”, “she sounded worried”, “she commented that she did not expect you to call her back today”, et cetera).

Plus, when Ruby connects a call to me, she always sounds so happy!  It is like she actually enjoys being able to connect the call to me!  That is astounding!  I have never had a receptionist as pleasant and joyful as Ruby is every single time!  Ruby apparently never gets “a case of the Mondays” or otherwise has a bad day.  Incredible!  I have to wonder what they put in the water there in Portland, and I wish I could import some of that magic elixir here for my own use!

One of the other greatest things about Ruby (and yes, I know I keep saying the next thing is the greatest thing, but there are just so many great things) is that she works from 7am until 8pm every Monday though Friday (Central Standard Time).  And on Saturdays she works from 11am until 8pm.  After hours and on Sundays, the calls go to a voice mailbox.  Or, I could just un-forward the phone and answer the calls myself.  Keep in mind, too, that Ruby does not take smoke breaks or ask for time off.  She is working constantly, answering my incoming phone calls–even during lunch!  How many receptionists would I have to hire to get this type of telephone coverage day-in and day-out?  At least three, if not four! 

How does Ruby do it?  She has at least 21 receptionists answering my calls, that’s how!  Each one tells me her name when she connects a call to me, and the Ruby website gives a short biographical note on each of them.  What an interesting group of people!  Each one of them alone would be the single best employee I could ever find, and together they form an unbeatable team.

Naturally, one would assume that a service as great as this is prohibitively expensive.  However, I have found the opposite to be true.  I have had in-office receptionists before, many of them.  Before Ruby, that was the only option.  However, I noticed Ruby’s advertising in the Texas Bar Journal some time last year.  I did a lot of research and I liked what I discovered about Ruby.  Ruby has been around for years, and she is not going away anytime soon.  She also has an excellent history of working with small businesses, especially small law firms.

I told myself that the next time I needed a new receptionist, I was going to try out Ruby.  So, when my last receptionist quit suddenly, I needed someone answering those phones quickly!  I called Ruby, and within two days I was forwarding my phone calls and starting my free trial.

Now, granted, I will admit that nothing beats having an actual person in the office to be that “first face” a client sees when they walk in the door.  Also, someone needs to be in the office to speak with visitors when I am not present.  Documents and paperwork just have to be dropped off and picked up sometimes.  Most importantly, payments need to be made.  However, there is no reason that this point-of-contact person has to be the receptionist.  It could just as easily be a legal assistant, or the office manager.  There is just no justification anymore for an on-site receptionist given the quality of service which Ruby provides, not to mention the cost-savings realized by outsourcing that position.

Figure that even paying the minimum wage for a receptionists (and good luck keeping the receptionist if that is all you are willing to pay) at $7.25 an hour.  At that rate, you would pay $290 a week for a 40-hour work week.  Add on the 8.63% that a small business employer pays in taxes over-and-above the hourly rate, and it will cost you $315.03 a week for that 40 hours of receptionist work.  That turns in to $1,365.14 a month, on average.  And that is minimum wage for one employee!

Ruby, on the other hand, costs significantly less.  There are three pricing plans available.  The first option includes only 100 receptionists minutes, and costs $199/month (that is $1.99 for every minute that Ruby herself is working a call).  The second includes 200 receptionists minutes, and it costs $329/month (or, $1.65 a receptionist minute).  The final option includes 500 receptionists minutes, and costs $669/month.  At that rate, it is supposed to be $1.34 a minute for actual receptionist time, though my calculations indicate it may be lower in actual use.

I selected the third option, as I knew I would use at least 500 minutes of receptionist time each month.  Ruby keeps a log of every phone call and message, which is a nice backup tool.  Mainly, though, it helps me analyze how I am using the service.  The following chart shows the number of phone calls I made and received during my first two months of paying for Ruby.  The number in the center indicates the number of calls I received on that day of the week, during each of the last eight weeks which I have been paying for Ruby:

I leave the phones forwarded all of the time, even after hours and on weekends.  So, these numbers also include voicemail calls as well.  Of the 945 calls my firm received during November and December 2009:  646 messages were taken and emailed to me [68%], 246 were connected to me at the office [26%], 41 went to voicemail because it was after hours [4%], 10 were connected to my cell phone [1%], and 2 were hang-up calls [<1%].

A wonderful thing about Ruby, though, is that I only pay Ruby when Ruby herself is working.  Voicemail calls do not cost a cent.  Nor does the time I spend talking to my callers after the call is connected.  Only the actual time that the receptionist is either making or receiving a call and connecting it does it count.  And, Ruby bills in thirty second increments!

My first paying month (after the expiration of my actual first month which was part of the free trial period, though that trial period is now a 14-day trial period instead of the month I received) was November and I used 505.5 receptionist minutes.  The cost was $656.10, partly because my service was prorated because the free trial did not end until the fifth day of November.  As a result, I was billed starting on the 6th day of the month.  During this past month, December, I used 704.5 minutes.  The cost was $844.17, though that bill included the one-time $95 initial setup fee which was assessed after I decided to keep using the service after the first thirty days.

As you can see, instead of paying one minimum-wage earning receptionist $1,400 a month at the very least, I pay Ruby about half of that amount.  And, I get thirteen hours a day during the work-week, and nine hours on Saturdays, of receptionist availability.  That is 74 hours a week, instead of a mere 40 that the one receptionist could provide.  In a month, Ruby gives me over 320 hours of receptionist availability!  If I had to pay Ruby the federal minimum wage for all of that availability, it would cost me over $2,500 a month!

Further, if you count all of the hours that Ruby is available to receive a call; even with the $844.17 cost for the month of December, I actually paid an effective hourly wage of just $2.43 an hour for every hour that she was ready to help (with deducting for that that 8.63% employer tax).

This is important to keep in mind because as we all know, in the typical small law firm the phones are, unfortunately, not ringing off the wall most days.  Just look at the chart above.  One day I received 60 calls, but on another I received only 7 (the day with zero calls was Christmas, the day with one call was Thanksgiving). 

The average call volume for me is 17 calls per day.  Or, if you only count work days, it is an average of 22 calls per day Monday through Friday.  The average call took 1.28 minutes of receptionist time.  That is a total of 28.16 minutes of receptionist time that I have to pay Ruby for each day.  But, with a traditional receptionist I would be paying for a full eight hours—even though the receptionist would be sitting there with nothing to do for 7.5 hours.  With Ruby, unlike with the typical small firm receptionist, I am not paying Ruby to sit around and read magazines or surf the internet for the majority of time each day.  I only pay Ruby when she is actually working for me!

One other thing that bears mentioning is how thoughtful Ruby is.  Of course, this also shows that Ruby is a master of marketing, as well.  During the free trial period, I received a box with a free coffee mug and some coasters—all with the Ruby logo.  It’s a great mug, and I’m glad to use it every day.  Plus, I received at least one note in the mail every day or two from one Ruby or another during those first few weeks.  Each one welcomed me to the Ruby family. 

The cards were small handwritten cards, and each had something nice to say about how much they appreciated me.  Ruby appreciates me?  That’s the craziest idea ever—do they not realize that I appreciate them far more than they could ever appreciate me?!?!  I should be sending them thank you cards every day of the week. 

Also, I should point out that it really is more than just a marketing gimmick.  One Friday morning about a month ago, I had a small automobile accident.  While waiting on law enforcement to show up, I emailed Ruby that I was going to take the rest of the day off to get the car in the repair shop and line-up a rental car.  Imagine my surprise when a few days later I received a hand-written sympathy card in the mail from the Ruby I had communicated with!

During the first 30 days of service, you can cancel Ruby at any time without notice.  After the first 30 days, though, Ruby does require a thirty day notice of cancellation.  Other than that, though, there is no commitment.  It is strictly month-to-month.  I suppose I would be billed a prorated portion of a month for that final part of the 30 days, but I do not intend to ever have to find this out for sure.  I would not quit using Ruby if I had a free receptionists walk in the door right now!

To be fair, I should address the negatives of Ruby, as well.  I have only had one problem, though it has occurred a few times.  On a few occasions, Ruby has managed to get a name wrong.  It is usually close enough that I can figure out who the caller was, or the caller will let me know when I ask for the wrong person when returning a call if it was someone I was not familiar with.  Admittedly, even with normal in-office reception work this is a common mistake.  So, I do not count the occasional mistake by Ruby to be a significant problem. 

On the other hand, I do practice in Central Texas.  As a result of this, I have a fair number of clients who only speak Spanish.  For this reason, I usually have tried to hire a Spanish-speaking receptionist.  As best as I can tell, not too many people in Portland, Oregon, speak Spanish, though.  This has not been a big issue thus far, but it would be a nice addition to Ruby’s repertoire if she could find at least one Spanish speaking receptionist.  Until then, Ruby can simply automatically forward those calls to my legal assistant for direct handling by her.

As I am sure you have already gathered, I enthusiastically endorse and highly recommend Ruby Receptionists.  They have chosen to specialize in answering calls, and I truly believe they are the best in the business.  The next time you find yourself in need of a telephone receptionist, give Ruby a try. 

Even better, Ruby would be a great service to have on stand-by even if you have an in-office receptionist right now.  That’s because Ruby can always take calls for you whenever your receptionist is on break, at lunch, enjoying a Saturday off, or is out of the office on vacation.  Ruby would be a fantastic back-up receptionist, ready to fill-in at a moment’s notice.  All you would have to do is forward your phone when you need her, and un-forward when you are done.

The truth is that I do not intend to ever hire a receptionist again.  I would rather have a legal assistant up front to greet whoever walks in the door.  I much prefer to have Ruby take all of the firm’s calls, and then forward them to the appropriate person.  That way, my callers will always receive a prompt and pleasant greeting from a true professional every time!  The receptionist is the most important employee in any law firm, and with Ruby I always have the best receptionists available.

If you decide to give Ruby Receptionists a try, tell them Jeff Parker referred you to them.  You will get 14 days of unlimited use to try out the service.  If you decide that it is not for you, just say no thanks and it will not cost you a cent.  Plus, you can always “un-forward” your phone calls at any time you decide to stop using Ruby.  However, if you decide to keep using Ruby, I will get a $50 referral fee and you will get good karma.  Now that’s a win-win-win scenario.

During the last session of the Texas Legislature, a bill was passed to allow the creation of special “veterans court programs” in this state.  The governor signed the bill into law on June 19, 2009, and it became effective September 1, 2009.  What that means is that we could have already started this program.

The veterans court program was a small part of a larger law which was designed to address the special needs of the approximately 1.7 million veterans who reside in Texas.  Specifically, the law created the “Fund for Veterans’ Assistance.”  The fund awards grants “to enhance or improve veterans’ assistance programs, including veterans’ representation and counseling, and to make grants to local communities to address veterans’ needs.”  One of the most important improvements, though, was the establishment of special pretrial veterans court programs.

Here’s how the program works:  The first step is for the county commissioners court to authorize the court.  Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 617 authorizes the commissioners court of a county to establish a veterans court program for persons arrested for or charged with any misdemeanor or felony offense.  There are no limits—it could be as simple as a drug or alcohol-related crime, or even domestic violence cases.

However, there are some limits.  A veteran is only eligible to participate in the veterans court program if: 1) the prosecutor agrees to the defendant’s participation in the program and 2) if the court in which the criminal case is pending finds that the defendant is a veteran or current member of the United States armed forces, including a member of the reserves, national guard, or state guard; and that the veteran suffers from a brain injury, mental illness, or mental disorder, including post-traumatic stress disorder, that resulted from the defendant’s military service in a combat zone or other similar hazardous duty area and materially affected the defendant’s criminal conduct at issue in the case.  Finally, the veteran ultimately retains the right to choose whether to proceed through the veterans court program or to just go through the regular criminal justice system.

Once the veteran qualifies and agrees to participate, the veteran participates in a special pretrial program.  The prosecutor and the criminal defense attorney are supposed to work together in a “non-adversarial” fashion to create an “individualized treatment plan” for the veteran. 

The individualized treatment plan lasts from a minimum of six months up to the maximum length of probation for whatever offense was charged.  The veteran can choose to withdraw from the program at any time, but then the veteran loses the benefits which would have been gained by successfully completing the pretrial intervention program. 

What are those benefits?  Well, the most important one is that any charges against the veteran would be dismissed.  That’s pretty big.  Also, the veteran is then entitled to go back and have the offense expunged from his criminal history!  That’s a huge one.

The law states that the cost to the veteran for participating in the program can be no more than $1,000; plus the cost of testing, counseling, and treatment fees in whatever amount is necessary to cover the costs of any such testing, counseling, or treatment provided under the program.

It’s also important to note that the veterans court is required by law to take steps to ensure “maximum participation of eligible defendants.”  Not only are our Bell County courts not ensuring maximum participation, they are not even ensuring any participation.  The courts can only ensure participation, though, after the county commissioners court authorizes the program.  Something our county commissioners court has yet to do!

Tarrant County is already going to be the first county to implement this type of program.  That distinction should have been ours.  If we are going to make this county a “great place” for our veterans, we need to implement this program as soon as possible.

Of course, the obvious caveat is that this is just one randomly selected week out of 52 total weeks in a year that our hard-working prosecutors are slaving away for low pay and very little appreciation. 

However, just for fun, it is interesting.  The complete document can be viewed by clicking here.  The breakdown, though, is as follows.  For this one week:

Seven defendants a week for assistant district attorneys versus 52 a week for assistant county attorneys?  Can anyone explain why ADAs earn so much more right off the bat?  It must be exhausting handling those 1.4 different defendants every day!  Whew!

What else is interesting?  How about the number of cases each felony prosecutor has and the corresponding offense levels?  For example, Stephanie Newell has six State Jail felonies this week, four third degrees, one second degree, and one first degree felony.  Here is the breakdown for this week:

And this one, which shows the percentage of pro se defendants each county attorney has to deal with this week, along with the supporting numbers:

One last one is what types of cases each county prosecutor is assigned for this week. I grouped similar offenses together (for example, ABI-FM and ABI were combined as was DWI firsts and DWI seconds, etc.). The numbers represent what percentage of that prosecutors’ caseload is made up of those type of cases (for example, 38% of Anne Jackson’s cases this week are assault-type cases). Here are the rest of the numbers:

The latest report by PCS in entitled One in 31: The Long Reach of American Corrections.  The One in 31 refers to the fact that 1 out of every 31 adults in the United States is either in prison, on parole, or on probation.  That’s 7.3 million people! 

The report also discusses how less than one-third of those 7.3 million people are behind bars; but that in spite of this, the states spend nearly 90 percent of their corrections budget on prisons.  It’s certainly an interesting read whether you agree with the conclusions or not.

Of most interest, though, is the information on this fact-sheet about Texas.  It should be called One in 22: The Long Reach of Texas Corrections.  Can you believe it?  One out of every 22 Texans is being actively watched and monitored by the government.  Big Brother is a Texan, apparently.  Who knew?  Astonishingly, though, Texas is only the fourth most controlling state in the Union.  We are behind Georgia, Idaho, and Washington, D.C.

Another interesting facts in the report is that in 2008 Texas spent $2.96 billion dollars on corrections, or 6.8 percent of the general fund.  Here is a chart that breaks down the percentages:

For example, they have a brochure entitled, “What to do if you can’t afford a lawyer in Texas.”

Another great brochure is entitled, “Why you need a defense lawyer if you are charged with a misdemeanor in Texas.”

For all of those judges who think indigent defense funds are coming out of their own pockets, it might be educational to read the petition filed in Williamson County on June 12, 2006.

Note that the father entered a no-contest plea “after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense.”  This got him “two life terms in prison plus 14 years.”

Best of all, he was “denied parole five times because he refused to admit guilt and enter a sex-offender treatment program.”  Of course.

If you’d like to use the Microsoft Word versions, you’ll need a barcode font that the County uses for all of their forms.  It is sold by a company called Carolina Barcode and you can buy it at their website: www.carolinabarcode.com. 

You want “Code 39 Barcode Fonts.”  Specifically, the “Standard Code 39 Barcode Font” for either Windows or Mac (depending on what type of computer you have).  It will cost you $29 to immediately download all of their Code 39 fonts.

Or, you could just use the PDF versions, and you’ll save yourself the trouble of buying, installing and testing for the right font.

Here are the updated files:

Agreed Motion for Continuance.doc
Agreed Motion for Continuance.pdf

Attorney Fee Voucher (Bell County).doc
Attorney Fee Voucher (Bell County).pdf

There is a second line for additional cause numbers in case your client has more than two causes.

The line below where the State signs is to put the name of the prosecutor.

The check boxes can be clicked with a mouse or by pressing the SPACEBAR when the field is highlighted by the TAB key.

If you have any questions, please let me know.  Enjoy.

Any lawyer who practices in federal court knows that you need to electronically file all documents with the clerk in Portable Document Format (with the .pdf extension).  However, having just recently spent $400+ on yet another upgrade to Adobe Acrobat Professional, I understand that not everyone likes spending $400+ every year or two just to have the latest greatest version of such a bloated program.  If you are only a casual filer, it doesn’t make much sense to spend that much money for a program with limited usefulness to your practice.  Therefore, I would suggest one of the free, or lower cost, alternatives to Adobe’s package.  Which one, though? Lawyers ask me that all the time.

Well, now I have found a website that not only answers that question, but also the question of which products the experts recommend as alternatives to almost any other popular program.

The website is called alternativeto.net, and it lists alternatives for many of today’s most popular commercial programs.  From PDF creators, to video editors, to photo editors, to just about anything else that you can think of.  It just might be worth a check to see if there is an alternative to that high priced software suite before you plunk down some serious money first.

Federal CJA Hourly Rates

$90 per hour: 5/1/02 to 12/31/05

$92 per hour: 1/1/06 to 5/19/07

$94 per hour: 5/20/07 to 12/31/07

$100 per hour: 1/1/08 to Today

Federal CJA Mileage Chart

36.5 cents per mile: 1/21/02 to 12/31/02

36.0 cents per mile: 1/1/03 to 12/31/03

37.5 cents per mile: 1/1/04 to 2/3/05

40.5 cents per mile: 2/4/05 to 8/31/05

48.5 cents per mile: 9/1/05 to 12/31/05

44.5 cents per mile: 1/1/06 to 1/31/07

48.5 cents per mile: 2/1/07 to 3/18/08

50.5 cents per mile: 3/19/08 to 7/31/08

58.5 cents per mile: 8/1/08 to 12/31/08

55.0 cents per mile: 1/1/09 to Today

In the criminal law specialization category, there were only 48 examinees who sat for the certification test this past October. Of those, exactly 50% passed the exam (24 new inductees). A minimum passing score was 350 points out of a possible 400. As of last year, there were only 841 out of the state’s approximately 80,000 attorneys who were Board Certified in Criminal Law, or approximately one percent.  Therefore, so long as no one lost their certification, there are now 865 Board Certified Criminal Law attorneys in Texas.

The induction ceremony took place this past Thursday, February 5, 2009.  The ceremony was at the Texas Law Center in Austin, and it was presided over by Wallace B. Jefferson, Chief Justice of The Texas Supreme Court. Also in attendance were other members of the Texas Supreme Court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, and the Third Court of Appeals in Austin. When Chief Justice Jefferson inadvertently introduced Lawrence E. Meyers as a Justice on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge Meyers responded by reminding the Chief Justice that “there is no justice on the Court of Criminal Appeals, only judges.”

Among the twenty-four newly certified criminal law attorneys, eight (or one-third of the total) identify themselves as prosecutors. This year’s class includes assistant district attorneys from the following counties: Anderson, Brazoria, Hays, Tarrant (three prosecutors), Wichita, and Williamson.

There was one Justice from the First District Court of Appeals in Houston, Justice Elsa Alcala. There was also one judge, the Honorable Jeremy Warren, Judge of Brazoria County Court at Law Number Three.

While the remaining fourteen appear to be defense attorneys, only eight of them are members of TCDLA. The other six may be defense attorneys, but I have yet to confirm this.

Also, in case you were curious like I was, here is some interesting trivia concerning this new class of certified criminal law attorneys: The average years of experience is 11, the median is 9. The person with the least amount of experience had only five years (the minimum for certification). The most experienced inductee had 25 years of experience.

Baylor University (my alma mater), Texas Tech, and Texas Wesleyan law schools each had three graduates certified in criminal law this year. South Texas, SMU, St. Mary’s, and UT each had two apiece. The following law schools had one each: Louisiana State, Regent University, Texas Southern, Tulane, University Of Houston, University Of Wyoming, and Valparaiso University.

The following chart summarizes the geographical locations of each new inductee:

According to the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, an attorney who is Board Certified in Criminal Law must have "experience in the preparation and trial of serious criminal matters.  The attorney must also have extensive knowledge of state and federal constitutional law, evidence, procedure and penal laws involved in the trial of these matters."

The qualifications for an attorney to become board certified are:

1. The attorney must have been licensed to practice law for at least five years;
2. The attorney must devote a required percentage of his or her practice to criminal law for at least the last three years;
3. The attorney must have handled a wide variety of criminal law matters which demonstrate his or her experience and involvement in criminal law;
4. The attorney must have attended criminal law continuing education seminars regularly to keep his or her legal training up to date;
5. The attorney must have been successfully evaluated by fellow lawyers and judges; and, most difficult of all,
6. The attorney must have passed a written examination demonstrating a thorough understanding of criminal law and procedure.

I am proud to announce that I have met each and every one of those qualifications, and I can now officially claim to be what I have long desired to be, a criminal law specialist in the State of Texas.  This has been a goal of mine ever since I took an interest in criminal law over twelve years ago while in law school.

I have long felt that if I was going to accept the responsibility of protecting the rights of my fellow citizens who have come to feel the power and force of their own government turning against them, then I must dedicate myself to learning everything that I can about the laws, rules and procedures which the government is going to use against my clients.  It is only by knowing the rules better than even the rule-makers themselves that I can truly protect those individuals who have put their trust in me to see them through a most difficult time.

The 2009 Induction Ceremony honoring all of the 2008 Newly Board Certified Attorneys will take place on Thursday, February 5, 2009 at 3:00 p.m., at the Texas Law Center in Austin, Texas.  At that time, members of the Supreme Court of Texas will preside over the presentation of Certificates of Special Competence which will be given to each of the new inductees.

Therefore, if you are on any of the court-appointed attorney lists, you need to print out your CLE courses and give them to the Indigent Defense Coordinator before the end of the year.

To get your CLE hours, go here and login.  It asks for your bar card number and your password.  If you do not yet have a password, what’s wrong with you?  This is a great resource for attorneys!  Once you logon to your "MyBarPage", go to the section labeled "My MCLE Hours".  Click the red box that says, "View/Report Hours".  You will then be taken to a page that shows all of your CLE for the last seven or eight years. 

You may have to change the year if your birthday (CLE anniversary) occurred after the criminal law CLE you completed.

Print out this list showing your six or more hours of criminal law CLE, and give it to the IDC and you’ll be in compliance.  Failure to provide proof of your CLE will result in your being placed on hold until you comply.  You have been warned!

The dockets are located at: http://www.jeffparkerlaw.com/dockets/.  The most recent week is listed at the top, and the previous weeks are below that.  The docket is in Adobe PDF format.  If you need a free reader, you can download the latest version here.

If you ever need to go back and check an old docket, I’ve got those, too.  I started combining the dockets on my website during the second week of August, so that’s the oldest one listed.

I recently joined a group of attorneys and court personnel on a tour of the new Bell County Jail.  We were allowed to see an almost 100% completed jail facility, and we spoke with jail administrators and staff about the new facility.  My verdict?  I like it.  It is very, very impressive.  It is an amazingly large facility, and it’s only going to get larger when they add the new section (as the need arises several years down the road).

And, yes, I know a lot of the local defense attorneys are upset because there are only a small number of meeting rooms where a defense attorney and his client can have a private, unmonitored conversation.  I also think that the video conferencing idea is a bad one (it allows cell mates to hear what an inmate is saying to his attorney, thus destroying the attorney-client privilege and guaranteeing that the conversation will be repeated by the cell-mate at your client’s trial). 

However, all-in-all, it’s a great jail and a wise use of Bell County tax dollars.  Every Bell County resident should be proud, and ashamed that we put off this inevitable construction for so long.

In the end, I am sure that we will find solutions for the minor problems which we anticipate, and the ones we have not yet realized. 

I, for one, would like to see a return to the days when attorneys could drop off correspondence for their client at the front of the jail.  In the olden days, we could write our client a letter and the jail staff would deliver it along with the regular mail.  I don’t know why they quit doing this, but they should start it again.  It allows for quicker communication, and it saves taxpayers the cost of the postage for court-appointed clients.  Even better, take inmate letters to their attorneys and put the letters in our boxes at the district court building.  That would be even more convenient and cost-effective as far as saving postage.  They are doing it already with "inmate service request" forms.  Would an envelope be any harder to put in a box?

1. You have got to have a way to keep up with your clients and their cases.  My solution is Time Matters.  I am using the Enterprise version 9.0 and I bought a server just for that purpose.  You can get by with the Professional Version until you add employees, but once other people need to access your client-matter database, you’ll want the reliability and security that only a server can offer you.  I love the ability to access everything about a client’s case on my BlackBerry.  Plus, the automatic document creation is worth the price of admission just by itself!  I cannot calculate the amount of time I save each day having routine documents spit out automatically for me.  Get your hands on some forms, and don’t waste money on ProDoc. 
2. Speaking of which, I have a Blackberry.  I like the Blackberry with the full keyboard because it is easier to type on.  With software that you can add, you can chat with your office staff even when in court.  That’s convenient.  I also have an Apple iPhone (and I give clients that phone number to reach me after hours), but that phone is mainly for entertainment purposes.  It’s much harder to type on, and the business software is sorely lacking.  Go with the Blackberry and wait for the iPhone to more fully develop.
3. A combination copier/fax/printer/scanner can save you a ton of money. 
   

   Especially if you lease it and sign a maintenance contract with the supplier company.  I have a Xerox 5030 and I love it!  I pay a flat rate each month to lease the copier, and then about a penny a page that I print.  The penny a page is the maintenance fee and it covers any and all repairs and adjustments that need to be made, and the cost of toner.  This thing scans like a champ, too!  If you want a paper-less office, you need a scanner like this one.  It’s difficult to setup, but once you’ve got it fine-tuned it’s alright.  Xerox could stand to improve their support, though.  None of their guys could figure out how to set it up and I found myself studying lots of Xerox manuals to get this working properly.

4. You’ll need a decent computer, and I built my own because I’m a nerd.  However, when my assistant’s computer conked out on me a few weeks ago, I just went with Dell.  The price is just as cheap as I could have built it myself, but the Dell comes with a warranty.
5. You won’t need a server to start, but Dell makes great servers, too.  I went with the Dell PowerEdge 840 and I even sprang for the best service and support plan they had.  I’m told that if anything ever goes wrong I can call for free North American technical support at any time.  I can’t confirm that, though, because nothing has ever gone wrong.
6. For software, you’ll need Microsoft Office (it’s the most compatible now – sorry, WordPerfect).  And you’ll need a PDF converter if you’re going to work in federal court (electronic filing mandates PDF files).  I use Adobe Acrobat Professional 9.0.  There are free ones, though, that will work until you feel the need for more advanced features.  The best free one is probably CutePDF.  The best free office substitute has got to be Open Office. 
7. You will need financial software, too.  I have tried them all, and they are all lacking and over-priced.  I currently use QuickBooks Premier for Professional Services.  I use QuickBooks payroll to pay employees (well worth the monthly fee to not have to fool with tax payments and withholding, etc.).  I also use QuickBooks as my credit card processor.  They have reasonable rates, and they were certainly convenient.  I will tell you, though, I am intrigued by this new QuickBooks Online version.  I may end up switching to that. 
8. I have a subscription to West research online.  I wish I had gone with Lexis (for the integration with Time Matters which is now owned by Lexis).  I suspect I will switch when my three year contract ends.  West is awful expensive, too.  Because I do a lot of appeals, I need access to lots of databases, and West loves sticking it to me since I have no other choice.  I also am annoyed by West because they now own ProDoc (which in spite of me bad mouthing it above, I still subscribe to).  I am going to drop it any day now, though I have been telling myself this for years.  Whatever you choose, you must have a way to research the law.  If not, just turn in your bar license now. 

There ya go.  That’s what I use and recommend.

I didn’t think that I would have any unclaimed property since I am in the habit of claiming all of the property I can, but there it was… a telephone bill that I must have overpaid several years ago.

When I searched the names of about a half-dozen attorneys, I found unclaimed property for every single one of them!  The amounts varied from around $50 (for me) to over $500 for one Temple attorney.

After you click the box to claim the property, you’ll have to enter in some identifying information about yourself.  Then, the Comptroller’s office will mail you a claim form to sign and mail back to them.  That’s it.  Simple enough.

Tip: the search allows you to type in your first name, last name, and a city.  Start off by doing this, but then go back and just type in your first name and last name without filling in the city.  Scan those results and look for old addresses for places you might have lived at in the past.  Then, enter in any alternative spellings of your name that you have used.

So, do yourself a favor, and check to see if you’ve got a secret stash of cash which Susan Combs is guarding for you.  If you feel compelled to pay me a finders fee, I’m sure something can be worked out.

The meeting is scheduled for noon on Friday, October 24, 2008, at the Dead Fish Grill in Belton. The meeting ends when we’re done asking Maj. Patterson questions.

This is a great opportunity to learn how things work at the jail and how things will work at the new jail. It is also a chance for us to let the people in charge over there know what concerns us.

The meeting is two weeks away, so there is plenty of time to reschedule your jail pleas for that afternoon or plea those jail birds out early. You will not want to miss this meeting!

Everyone is invited, and strongly encouraged to be there. As criminal defense attorneys, we need to present a united front in these situations so that those in positions of power will understand that we are a force to be reckoned with. United we stand, divided we fall, folks. Please do not let your fellow defense attorneys down, we need each and every one of you there!

About the only interesting thing that jumps out at me is the fact that Webb County takes just as long as Bell County does to resolve felony cases.  That’s interesting because Webb County has a pretty generous flat-fee rate for court appointed attorneys.  I would have thought that meant those court appointed attorneys would plead their cases out super fast (in order to maximize their profit on a flat fee case).  That doesn’t appear to be true, though.  I guess flat fees don’t promote a “plead ‘em quick” mentality.

Looking at other Texas counties that have about the same size populations as Bell County, we can see the following conviction rates for the last three years:

This chart contains data from October 1, 2005, to September 30, 2008.

Looking at the chart, you can quickly see that Bell County and Williamson County have the highest conviction rates. But what don’t you see? I don’t see a connection between court-appointed attorney rates and conviction rates. A recent post of mine shows the court appointed attorney hourly rates for these same counties. Looking at that chart and this one, I don’t see a connection.

For example, Jefferson County pays the lowest hourly fees, but they have the lowest conviction rate. Conversely, Webb County pays the highest hourly fees. and they have a slightly higher than average conviction rate.

Of course, Bell County has the highest conviction rate of Texas counties our size – and we are tied for second-to-lowest court appointed hourly rates. However, Galveston has the same hourly rate, and their conviction rate is as much lower than the average conviction rate as our county is higher (70% versus 95% , with an 82% state-wide average).

Bottom line, these numbers are interesting, but I’m not sure what conclusions we can draw from just looking at this limited data set. Looking at just these counties, over the last three years, there does not appear to be a correlation between conviction rates and court appointed attorney compensation rates.

Does anyone have any other ideas on what the cause of higher-than-average conviction rates?

To get the number of attorneys in each of the four closest counties on either side of Bell County (population wise), I looked at the most recent data available in the State Bar’s Attorney Population Density by Metropolitan Statistical Area Report: 2005-06. That report shows that each county has the following number of attorneys:

The ratio shows you how many attorneys there are for each person in that county.  For example, in Bell County, there is only one attorney for every 993 persons in the county.  That’s the most favorable attorney-to-potential client ratio around for counties our size. 

Also, keep in mind, that not every attorney practices criminal defense law.  One of the few things that you cannot get from the State Bar is a percentage of attorneys that practice criminal law.  The closest thing that I could find was that about 3% of all Texas attorneys belong to the criminal justice section of the State Bar.  I imagine that there are many attorneys who aren’t members of the criminal justice section since the criminal justice section of the State Bar is such a joke right now. 

So, is there a connection between attorney density and court appointed attorney fees?  It appears there might be.  Look at Jefferson County.  They pay the worst, a flat $50 per hour.  However, they also have the most attorneys per population ratio for counties our size.  There are just too many attorneys there to justify paying more than what the market likely will bear there.  Also, Webb County appears to pay the best, and they have an attorney to population ratio about the same as Bell County.  There are anomalies, though.  Williamson County for example pays horribly compared to how many attorneys live in that county.  I would suspect they get a lot of Travis County attorneys; plus, keep in mind that they are being sued by the Task Force on Indigent Defense right now anyway.  So, maybe it’s not the greatest idea to look at Williamson County to see what we should be doing!

By the way, the State Bar has determined that the average hourly rate for retained criminal defense attorneys in Texas is $207.  The median amount is $175 per hour.

One would think that since Bell County has the fewest attorneys per resident of all counties our size that we’d be paid the highest court appointed attorney fees.  Any idea why we aren’t?

The population data came from the U.S. Census Bureau. It represents the estimated population of the listed Texas counties as of July 1, 2007.

The rest of the data came from the Task Force on Indigent Defense Website. According to the fee schedules listed there, the following details what local court appointed attorneys are paid:

WILLIAMSON COUNTY:
Except for good cause shown, court-appointed attorney fees will be as follows:
Routine felony plea = $500
Routine felony plea (Spanish-speaking defendant) = $750
Jury trial (per day) = $1,000
Jury trial (per day) (Spanish-speaking defendant) = $1,250

NUECES COUNTY:
Guilty plea, plea of true, or dismissal by Defendant = $250-$450
Dismissal on State’s motion = $100 to $400
Nonjury trial = $60-$80 per hour in court / $30-$60 per hour out of court
Jury trial = $500-$750 per full day, $250-$375 per half day, in court; $30-$50 out of court

BRAZORIA COUNTY:
Guilty plea = $100 minimum
Everything else = $60 – $90 per hour

GALVESTON COUNTY:
$60 per hour

LUBBOCK COUNTY:
$75 per hour; with minimum of $300 per plea

JEFFERSON COUNTY:
Public defenders maxed at $8333 per month (appointed on a monthly basis)
Rotation attorneys paid $500 per half-day in trial or contested hearings
$1,000 per plea/dismissal of single case
$1,200 per plea/dismissal of multiple cases for same defendant

WEBB COUNTY:
$85 per hour on SJF/3rd in trial / $75 per hour hearings / $50 per hour out of court
$100 per hour on 2nd in trial / $85 per hour hearings / $60 per hour out of court
$125 per hour on 1st in trial / $100 per hour hearings / $75 per hour out of court
Flat fee for plea: $500 SJF/3rd; $750 2nd; $1,000 1st

McLENNAN COUNTY:
$40-100 per hour in court; $35-$75 per hour out of court
Flat fee for plea: $400 SJF/3rd; $500 2nd; $750 1st

Not once in the article, though, did it mention that Judge Duffield inquired as to an accused’s financial situation and whether or not that defendant could make any particular bail amount. No, on the contrary, he apparently continues to set bail amounts according to the usual preset bail schedule without any regard to his legal duty to see that a bail is not oppressively high and without any regard to the ability of the accused to make bail.

County Commission Richard Cortese said the public does not care about bail amounts. He claims that “defense attorneys and family members of the person arrested are the people who usually get upset and complain about high bail amounts.” He then continues by stating that the victims of crime generally believe bail amounts are too low. “They want the person who broke into their house to stay behind bars,” he said. Wow! An elected official that has never heard of the presumption of innocence. Innocent until proven guilty? Not in Bell County! Are there any constitutional rights that can survive in Bell County?

Setting bail in Bell County is a precise procedure, the only problem is that it is precisely wrong.

That is absolute, 100%, correct.  However, the very next paragraph goes on to say “Attorney John Galligan said it is common for bail hearings to reduce bail amounts by 80 to 90 percent.”  That I don’t know about.

Sure, the typical felony defendant’s bail gets reduced from an ungodly number down to $1,000 once they plead guilty.  But, that’s usually the only way to get such a huge reduction.  Otherwise, the judges usually reduce the bail from an ungodly amount down to just an unholy amount.  What good does that do?

Here’s the problem, though: a good number of defendants post bond before they get a bail reduction.  Then, they are paying their bond companies huge sums of money to get out of jail.  That typically means that there is no money left to hire a criminal defense attorney.  So, since they are charged with felonies, what happens?  They get a court-appointed lawyer.  Who pays for that?  We, the taxpayers. 

So, by setting initial bail amounts so high, a defendant has to pay what little money they have saved up over time, or what little money their families can scrape together, to get that person out of the jail.

The situation is better if the defendant hires a criminal defense lawyer first, because then the lawyer can go to the judge assigned to the case and get the bail lowered to a more reasonable amount.  That only happens, though, when the defendant hires the lawyer first.  Meanwhile, though, that person sits in jail and waits until the defense attorney can go to a judge and get a lowered bail amount (unless they have so much money that they can afford to hire a lawyer and hire a bondsman — and not very many people do).

So, why are we forcing people to stay in jail longer than necessary with these artificially high bail bonds?  Why not just set a reasonable bail amount to begin with and save everyone (including the taxpayers) a lot of money?  Well, according to the article, Judge Ted Duffield was at a conference and unavailable for comment.  Where was “Million Dollar” Judge Ivey for comment?

Well, a little investigation revealed some interesting information. Here is a breakdown of just who is in the BCJ right now:

Keep in mind that the BCJ only has 708 beds. I guess 70 inmates are sharing beds? However it works out over there, it seems like there are still an awful large number of people in the BCJ with excessive bail amounts. I don’t know, because each case is unique and I have not studied each and every case (obviously). I do wonder, though, if anyone else has.

For example, looking at State Jail felony offense possession under a gram cases, there are 35 inmates in the BCJ right now with that offense being the most serious thing they are charged with. I don’t know what percentage of those have no prior felony convictions, but I imagine a good number of them are first timers. And, of course, those with no prior felonies are automatically entitled to probation on their first State Jail felony possession case. Automatic probation. And yet, a good number of inmates are sitting in jail, an average of 77 days so far, most with bail amounts of $25,000! $25,000 and they are guaranteed probation if it’s a first felony offense? What is the rationale behind this?

By the way, for all of you good criminal defense lawyers out there, notice the median bond amounts. Now when someone asks you what their bond is likely to be set at, you can say with some confidence that the normal Bell County bail for a:

1st Degree Felony = $150,000
2nd Degree Felony = $75,000
3rd Degree Felony = $75,000
State Jail Felony = $25,000
Felony probation revocation = $50,000
Class A Misdemeanor = $5,000
Class B Misdemeanor = $2,500
Misdemeanor probation revocation = $5,000

Of course, looking at these numbers, something appears quite curious. Notice the neat stacking of numbers. What a coincidence that a median Class A bail amount just happens to be twice that of a median Class B bail amount. There appears to be a slight problem with the pattern though. Because a State Jail Felony is $25,000. Doubling that should make a Third Degree Felony $50,000 (but the median jumps up to $75,000). The Second Degree Felony is at $75,000, which oddly enough is half of a First Degree Felony, at $150,000.

Does this neat pattern indicate that Bell County bail amounts are being set according to some predetermined value ladder? Surely the local magistrates are obeying their sworn duties to apply and uphold the law and are individually setting each of these amounts, right? Well, see this post if there is any doubt

[The data used in this analysis is available on my website as an Excel file, by clicking here. Keep in mind, though, that this spreadsheet only shows one offense for each inmate, the offense with the highest bond amount. The most current list is available on the Sheriff’s website: Bell County Active Inmate List.]

Thompson’s bail was set at one million dollars due to “peripheral issues,” according to the article. Judge G. W. Ivey apparently recommended a million dollar bail at the request of a detective with the Belton Police Department “who believed Thompson was not cooperating with the investigation.”

Judge Ted Duffield, who officially set the bail, said that he thought that the amount “seemed high for a criminal mischief charge” and briefly considered reducing the million dollar bail when Thompson appeared before him. Duffield did not reduce the bail, though, but instead deferred to the bail amount recommended by Judge Ivey.

Further, the article reported, the Belton Police Department consulted with the Bell County District Attorney’s office, who agreed with a “high bail amount” so as to “send a clear message to the young people involved with the case that it was a serious felony.”

Thus, it appears that Bell County officials involved believed that Thompson should be held in the overcrowded Bell County Jail because he refused to cooperate with the police and because the prosecutors wanted to send a clear message to other young people about the seriousness of the alleged offense. These factors must be based upon “Bell County law,” though.

The problem with Bell County law is that it conflicts squarely with Texas and federal laws. Texas law sets out the rules to follow when a court official sets the amount of bail in a criminal case. The law states that: 1) the bail should be high enough to reasonably assure that the person will show up for court, 2) the bail should not be oppressively high, 3) the nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was committed are to be considered, 4) the ability of the accused to make bail must be considered, and 5) the future safety of a victim of the offense and the community must be considered, as well. This law is found in Article 17.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

What is missing from the five factors? Certainly cooperating with the police isn’t there. Since when have we as a society ever required anyone arrested with a crime to cooperate with government agents, anyway? Has the Belton Police Department ever heard of the United States and Texas Constitutions? Perhaps the right to remain silent doesn’t apply in Bell County. What about sending clear messages to young people? That’s not one of the five factors, either.

Looking at what the law does allow, though, we can see what a poor job our elected local officials did in following Texas law: First, a million dollar bail would almost certainly guarantee any 17-year-old kid would show up for court. However, wouldn’t a $20,000 bail do the same thing? Apparently the 426th District Court thought so, at least according to the article, because that was the amount of bail once Thompson had the benefit of a criminal defense attorney to assert his rights. Secondly, does anyone think that a million dollar bail would not almost always be oppressive to a 17-year-old, or just about anyone else for that matter? Thirdly, the nature of the offense is that a seven-year-old vehicle was apparently stolen and driven into a lake after an unsupervised teen party. While the owner of the vehicle did not deserve to have his car stolen, should he really be surprised something bad happened after leaving his teenager home alone over the weekend? Fourthly, I wonder what inquiry Judges Ivey and Duffield made into Thompson’s ability to come up with a million dollars? Maybe Thompson had saved up a million dollars working a part-time fast-food job when not attending high school. Who knows? Finally, the future safety of a victim of the offense and the community. Can anyone explain how the safety of the community or the safety of the M.I.A. father would be at risk if Thompson had been released under a reasonable bail?

Perhaps Thompson is not alone, though. Perhaps Bell County is overrun with crime and criminals and we are all at danger except for the heroic efforts of a few unappreciated and little understood court officials. Looking at the Bell County Jail population on Sunday, September 21, 2008, one could see that there were nine inmates with million dollar or higher bails set. Of course, all but two of those were in jail at the time for murder. With one of the remaining two charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and the other one charged with having escaped from a jail previously. Naturally, one can see how a 17-year-old alleged car thief deserves the same bail as a bunch of murderers. Although, not every alleged murderer has a million dollar bail. In fact, on Sunday, a couple of alleged murderers had bail amounts set at just $100,000.

Perhaps, then, it is the nature of Thompson’s alleged crime that makes it especially heinous. Maybe driving a 2001 Chevy Camaro Z-28 into a lake just can not be tolerated in Bell County. That is why the four individuals sitting in the Bell County jail on Sunday morning who were charged in other incidents of felony criminal mischief should be thankful that their bail amounts were set at $10,000; $15,000;$20,000 and $50,000 each. One can only assume that those four individuals, however, must be cooperating fully with the police, and the young people of Bell County must have already received clear messages concerning those cases.

For comparison purposes, though, there were eight persons in the Bell County Jail on this past Sunday who were each charged with aggravated sexual assault on children. Surely that is also a serious crime where the prosecutors would want to send clear messages by requesting high bail amounts, right? And certainly in that type of case we would want a high bail set unless those accused of having engaged in sexual contact with children came forward and were totally cooperative with the compassionate and understanding police forces of our county, right? Well, apparently not, because only one of the eight even has a half a million dollar bail, and the rest have an average bail of around $200,000 (with one set at only $75,000).

Do not mistake the point I am trying to make, though. I am not making a blanket statement that Bell County bail amounts are not high enough in sexual assault cases, or murder cases, or any particular case. Maybe bail amounts are too high or too low, and maybe they aren’t. I don’t know. It is certainly possible that the magistrates in other cases followed Texas law, and that court officials determined that $75,000 was enough money to ensure that that the particular alleged child molester in that case would show up for court and not endanger anyone’s safety when released. The point I am trying to make, though, is that it is a shame that John Thompson didn’t receive the same consideration in the setting of his bail amount as others apparently have.

Both The United States Constitution and the Texas Constitution provide every citizen with the right to a reasonable bail. Both Constitutions also guarantee all citizens the right to equal protection of the law. FBI Director Robert Mueller has said that “When just one of us loses just one of our rights, then the freedoms of all of us are diminished.” The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the lead agency for investigating violations of federal civil rights laws. The Texas Rangers investigate violations of Texas law when local officials are unwilling or unable to do so. Maybe it’s time for one of those agencies to start asking Bell County officials, “Setting bail: Why do the amounts vary so much”?

‘It’s political silly season, and this fits’
By Justin Cox
Killeen Daily Herald

The issue was whether a trial court could order a defendant to pay court appointed attorney fees in an amount to be determined at a later date (presumably when the attorney got around to submitting a bill). The Third Court agreed with my argument that the trial court cannot fail to set an amount. The Court held that the amount does not have to be stated in front of the defendant while he is standing there in court at his or her sentencing hearing, but it does have to set the amount at some point before the judgment becomes final.

The result of this earth-shattering opinion is that the court can file a judgment nunc pro tunc to correct the amount of court appointed attorneys fees owed by a defendant, so long as it does so before the judgment becomes final.

HTML version here. PDF version here.

Convicted Killeen man’s victim dies; murder charge possible
Posted on: Wednesday, December 12, 2007, 12:00 AM
By Justin Cox
http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=21185

http://www.temple-telegram.com/story/2007/09/26/43826

Man guilty of nursing home assault
Posted on: Wednesday, September 26, 2007, 12:00 AM
By Justin Cox
http://www.kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?s=19034