Comments on: Practice Pointer: Navigating a Novel Cert. Problem http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/ The Supreme Court of the United States blog Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:56:34 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Michael J.Z. Mannheimer http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-14759 Michael J.Z. Mannheimer Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:39:28 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/#comment-14759 That's all well and good when one is dealing with an adversary who acts with professionalism. I once had a case in which the New York County District Attorney filed a response brief in an appeal, claiming that my client had a prior conviction for drug possession. There was nothing in the record about the conviction so I called the assistant district attorney on the case and asked that the brief be re-filed with the unsupported claim excised. She told me, in effect, to drop dead. I filed a motion to strike the brief for referring to matters outside the record. In the D.A.'s response, she admitted that the reference to the non-existent prior conviction had been a mistake! If only she had actually cite-checked the brief before filing it or, at the latest, when I informed her of the mistake. That’s all well and good when one is dealing with an adversary who acts with professionalism. I once had a case in which the New York County District Attorney filed a response brief in an appeal, claiming that my client had a prior conviction for drug possession. There was nothing in the record about the conviction so I called the assistant district attorney on the case and asked that the brief be re-filed with the unsupported claim excised. She told me, in effect, to drop dead. I filed a motion to strike the brief for referring to matters outside the record. In the D.A.’s response, she admitted that the reference to the non-existent prior conviction had been a mistake! If only she had actually cite-checked the brief before filing it or, at the latest, when I informed her of the mistake.

]]> By: Peter Goldberger http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-14748 Peter Goldberger Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:01:30 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/#comment-14748 Thanks for the props, Tom. It is always a pleasure and a privilege to work with you. For the readers of SCOTUSBlog who don't know (which I presume would be most), let me clarify that Amy Baron-Evans is one of the two AO-funded Sentencing Resource Counsel for the Federal Public Defender network -- an Assistant Federal Defender who works out of the Boston office but has national responsibilities as a sentencing expert, policy spokesperson and resource for court-appointed counsel, public and private, in federal criminal cases. She is an absolutely outstanding lawyer. Thanks for the props, Tom. It is always a pleasure and a privilege to work with you. For the readers of SCOTUSBlog who don’t know (which I presume would be most), let me clarify that Amy Baron-Evans is one of the two AO-funded Sentencing Resource Counsel for the Federal Public Defender network — an Assistant Federal Defender who works out of the Boston office but has national responsibilities as a sentencing expert, policy spokesperson and resource for court-appointed counsel, public and private, in federal criminal cases. She is an absolutely outstanding lawyer.

]]> By: Jon Eisenman http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-14741 Jon Eisenman Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:58:05 +0000 http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/practice-pointer-navigating-a-novel-cert-problem/#comment-14741 If the SG's office didn't come around, I wonder what effect--if any--this blog post would have had on the SG or the Court (assuming, as is likely, that a few people in both places read the blog). For that matter, I wonder if the post will make the law clerks more closely scrutinize this case ahead of conference (assuming that the SG's letter doesn't already do that). I am, of course, taking for granted that if the SG hadn't acted, then you probably wouldn'tve posted this. But even if you hadn't, the SG's BIO is available online already, so anyone with an academic interest in the issue and a blog of his own could've been an amicus blogger. Obviously, in that case, the affect of the post would be dependent on the reputation of the person and the venue for the post, so I guess that in the end this devolves into a more ho-hum sort of question about the influence that the media can have on law clerks, lawyers, or even judges. The more novel spin in this case, though, comes from the savviness of the players. If the SG’s office didn’t come around, I wonder what effect–if any–this blog post would have had on the SG or the Court (assuming, as is likely, that a few people in both places read the blog). For that matter, I wonder if the post will make the law clerks more closely scrutinize this case ahead of conference (assuming that the SG’s letter doesn’t already do that).

I am, of course, taking for granted that if the SG hadn’t acted, then you probably wouldn’tve posted this. But even if you hadn’t, the SG’s BIO is available online already, so anyone with an academic interest in the issue and a blog of his own could’ve been an amicus blogger. Obviously, in that case, the affect of the post would be dependent on the reputation of the person and the venue for the post, so I guess that in the end this devolves into a more ho-hum sort of question about the influence that the media can have on law clerks, lawyers, or even judges. The more novel spin in this case, though, comes from the savviness of the players.

]]>