So what do you do when your client is guilty? Craig Mastantuono spoke at a training seminar on criminal sentencing hearings last week at the State Public Defender’s Conference, sharing his thoughts on this very subject. His outline for that talk addresses this often misunderstood and difficult process.
Archive for the ‘Due Process’ Category
Criminal Sentencings, or, What do you do when your client is guilty?
Friday, November 11th, 2011Case Results: UPDATE MLO successfully challenges the constitutionality of law that automatically bars individuals from possessing a firearm following a civil court proceeding.
Tuesday, July 19th, 2011In a decision today, a Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge dismissed the State’s case against our client, in a case further described below. This is a victory for our client, and for our Constitutional right to possess a firearm, particularly in one’s home and for protection. The law authorizes the government to place reasonable restrictions on firearms. However, Attorney Rebecca Coffee successfully argued today that a one-size-fits all prohibition on gun possession, under any and all circumstances, for individuals following a civil court proceeding was unconstitutional as applied to our client.
In Wisconsin, individuals who are subject to a domestic abuse civil injunction automatically lose their constitutional right to possess a firearm, under any circumstances, for any reason. A domestic abuse injunction is granted if a Court finds “reasonable grounds to believe” that the respondent has engaged in, or may engage in, domestic abuse of the petitioner. If a court grants the injunction, the statute automatically requires a respondent to surrender any firearms. This automatic ban does not contain any exceptions, other than for law enforcement officials, including no exceptions allowing an individual to possess a firearm for protection or self-defense in his or her home. The statute also does not make available any argument by a respondent, or finding by a court official, that the particular individual should not be subject to the automatic prohibition. Mastantuono Law Office has argued that this automatic ban of a fundamental constitutional right following a civil proceeding, violates our client’s right under the U.S. and Wisconsin Constitutions to keep and bear arms for self-defense and protection, a right recently re-affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008).
The case is currently pending before the trial court in Milwaukee. This blog will be updated with the result of the case.
IN THE NEWS: Mastantuono Law Office contacted for comment on racial profiling.
Saturday, March 5th, 2011Bill Puts Racial Profiling Data at Risk
March 4, 2011
By Jack Zemlicka, Wisconsin Law JournalThe ongoing collection of age, race and gender data by police during routine traffic stops to assess the existence of racial profiling could be an evidentiary resource for attorneys.
But a legislative push to repeal the mandate jeopardizes the chances the data will provide any value to the criminal justice system.
On Feb. 23, the state Senate passed Bill 15, which would undo the current law passed as part of the 2009-11 budget that took effect Jan. 1.
The State Bar of Wisconsin opposes the repeal and some defense attorneys argued ongoing collection of data during stops could provide ammunition to suppress evidence in cases where racial profiling is suspected and also to challenge the credibility of police.
Milwaukee criminal defense attorney Craig Mastantuono, of Mastantuono Law Office SC, said any substantial data could be particularly useful in “borderline” cases to raise the issue of whether an officer disproportionately pulls over people of a certain race.
“Then profiling becomes more germane of an inquiry and keeping data can help,” he said.
Reliable data to support a history of initiating stops of people of primarily one race invites a challenge of police practice, said criminal traffic lawyer Basil Loeb of Schmidlkofer, Toth & Loeb LLC, Wauwatosa.
“That can certainly go to their credibility and be used early on in a proceeding to determine whether the stop or arrest is valid,” he said.But others questioned the practical significance the data would have on cases.
Given that officers have constitutional protection for pretext stops for a minor violation such as a broken taillight, criminal defense attorney Michele Anne Tjader suggested the data would have minimal impact on the outcome of a case.
“I don’t think it would have been used in an evidentiary sense as far as providing defense counsel with a basis to challenge traffic stops and so forth,” she said.
Tjader, of Tjader Law SC, Madison, said the data would be more beneficial from a policy standpoint in that law enforcement could evaluate any racial inconsistencies in traffic stops.
Regardless of the results, the data collection would be most useful in analysis, rather than case strategy, said Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm.
“Race is almost never a factor in an individual case review,” he said. “But the information is always there, so the benefit is really more of a macro review of the process and trying to determine discrepancies.”
Proponents of the repeal argued the data collection during traffic stops is duplicative and tedious, given that race, gender and age are already collected on citations.
Mastantuono called those arguments “baloney” and said the data collection requires little more than checking a box.
“Let the data speak for itself,” he said. “It sounds to me that people fear the answers.”
But more than two months of empirical data would be needed to paint an accurate picture of police practices.
The impetus for the collection of racial and gender-based data during stops is rooted in a 1999 task force appointed by Gov. Tommy Thompson, which recommended police record the data to “build accountability and protect the integrity of law enforcement agencies.”
In 2007, Gov. Jim Doyle advanced the initiative by forming the Commission on Reducing Racial Disparities in the Wisconsin Justice System. A report was issued the following year and recommendations that law enforcement conduct a county-by-county baseline study of racial disparity using existing traffic citation and arrest data to determine disparity levels in the state were adopted in the 2009-11 state budget.
WI Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Homicide Charge for Mastantuono Law Client
Wednesday, April 7th, 2010Mastantuono Law Office released the press statement below today, following a favorable decision in the Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirming the Burnett County Circuit Court’s dismissal of a homicide prosecution against one of our clients. Our client defended himself with a firearm in his own home against a hostile intruder. The State charged him with homicide, alleging his actions in self-defense were unreasonable. When key evidence favorable to our client turned up missing, we moved to dismiss the case. The trial judge agreed. See the Minneapolis Star Tribune story on the trial Judge’s dismissal here.
Today, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial judge’s decision. We feel this decision, recommended for publication, has important implications for the due process rights of those investigated and charged by the government, and for holding the government to reasonable standards of care when conducting such investigations.
For immediate release: The defense agrees with the Court of Appeals’ ruling in favor of Mr. Huggett and rejecting the State’s position, which was an effort to convince the Court to break from established legal authority and allow the government to avoid responsibility for losing critical evidence during an important investigation. Mr. Huggett cooperated fully with police following a nighttime break-in at his home carried out by the decedent and two other men, during which Mr. Huggett was forced to defend himself and the others in his home. He gave evidence to police regarding the decedent’s actions and his threats – contained in voicemails from the same evening as the incident and accessed through his cell phone – and trusted that this evidence would be preserved. Instead, authorities lost the evidence, and then sought to hold Mr. Huggett responsible for that loss in this case and appeal. Mr. Huggett feels vindicated by this decision rejecting the State’s position, and sincerely hopes to put this entire unfortunate incident behind himself and his family.
The Court of Appeals Decision can be found here. Mastantuono Law Office’s Appellate Court brief on behalf of Mr. Huggett can be found here.
CM