This case is before the Supreme Court now. Civil asset forfeitures have blown into a muli-million dollar a year operation and in plenty of cases, the punishment sure doesn't fit the crime. Especially when no crime has been charged, but the government goes after someone's stuff anyway
"In the 26 states and District of Columbia that report forfeiture activity, law enforcement agencies collected more than $254 million in funds and property in 2012 alone, according to an analysis by the Institute for Justice, a non-profit libertarian public interest law firm."
ABCNEWS.GO.COM
Government took his Land Rover, now this man wants Supreme Court to get it back
Oklahoma F-Warriors
March 25, 2018 at 8:01 PM ·
Lawyers, don’t miss this years Texas Regional. Bring your cases and learn the skills to Discovering The Story with your TLC friends and family. See y’all there!
Please like and share and invite your friends!
Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
February 19, 2018 at 3:23 PM ·
The following is an official statement from OCDLA President Al Hoch regarding the viral criticism of Murray County District Judge Wallace Coppedge, regarding his acceptance of a plea in a rape case which was committed at Falls Creek church camp. This statement was previously distributed to various news outlets who apparently chose not to run it.
As president of the Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (OCDLA) and on behalf of our approximately 500 members, I believe that it is of the utmost importance that our organization respond to what we believe are the unfair and unwarranted attacks on a member of the judiciary. As you know Judge Coppedge from Murray County has been criticized for accepting an agreed plea in a rape case which resulted in probation for the defendant with very strict supervision rules, including wearing of an ankle monitor and the requirement to register as a sex offender for life as well as other conditions.
This was an agreed plea with a recommendation from the prosecutor and approval in court from the attorney for the victim and her family. Members of the judiciary are prohibited by the Code of Judicial Conduct from commenting on any case even after its conclusion and thus from responding to any unfair criticism they may receive.
I believe it is the duty of all attorneys to support a fair and independent judiciary. To allow these recent comments by some individuals as well as other efforts against the judiciary to go unanswered is to be complicit by our inaction. The actions of the judge in this case were appropriate and wholly proper. It is the duty of the district attorney to evaluate their case and determine if they have sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction at trial. It is also a legal, constitutional and ethical obligation of prosecutors to disclose all exculpatory evidence to the defense. Having done this it is then a decision they must make as to the viability of their case for trial.
Often cases change over time and witnesses choose not to testify or may be unavailable for a number of reasons. Additional evidence becomes available and renders a case less appealing to a jury or more difficult to succeed in and then a prosecutor has to make a decision of what is best for the victim of a crime and the furtherance of justice. A review of the transcript in the present case shows that the judge made inquiries of the prosecutor regarding the plea agreement and also had input from a separate attorney representing the interests of the victim and her family. Without any objection from anyone involved in the case the judge followed what is a reasonable and prudent course of action and accepted the plea offered by the district attorney.
I must assume the district attorney in this case made the decision to offer this plea after consultation with the victim, her family and review of the strengths and weaknesses of the case. To criticize the entire process and attempt to have a chilling effect on judges throughout the state cannot be allowed to proceed and it is for that reason that after discussions with the board of directors of the OCDLA that I felt it was imperative to respond to these attacks on the Oklahoma judiciary.
For clarification neither I, nor the board of directors of OCDLA is doing this in agreement with or at the specific request of any judicial officer in this state. This is solely due to our concern that the rights and freedoms of all of the citizens of Oklahoma are at stake if the independence of the judiciary is allowed to become a political pawn and to help ensure that everyone understands the need to maintain three separate and distinct branches of government. It would be a sad day for this state if we allowed the legislature to intimidate the very professional and ethical judges we are privileged to have in Oklahoma.
Although the members of OCDLA may not agree with every decision made by each and every judge in this state, we must support the decisions made in this case as there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by this judge. We support the rights of all to freedom of speech and peaceful discourse but must also stand firm against uninformed and unwarranted attacks on the very fabric of a free society, that being an independent judiciary free from political or partisan pressure.
Albert J. Hoch, Jr.
President, OCDLA
The following is an official statement from OCDLA President Al Hoch regarding the viral criticism of Murray County District Judge Wallace Coppedge, regarding his acceptance of a plea in a rape case which was committed at Falls Creek church camp. This statement was previously distributed to various news outlets who apparently chose not to run it.
As president of the Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association (OCDLA) and on behalf of our approximately 500 members, I believe that it is of the utmost importance that our organization respond to what we believe are the unfair and unwarranted attacks on a member of the judiciary. As you know Judge Coppedge from Murray County has been criticized for accepting an agreed plea in a rape case which resulted in probation for the defendant with very strict supervision rules, including wearing of an ankle monitor and the requirement to register as a sex offender for life as well as other conditions.
This was an agreed plea with a recommendation from the prosecutor and approval in court from the attorney for the victim and her family. Members of the judiciary are prohibited by the Code of Judicial Conduct from commenting on any case even after its conclusion and thus from responding to any unfair criticism they may receive.
I believe it is the duty of all attorneys to support a fair and independent judiciary. To allow these recent comments by some individuals as well as other efforts against the judiciary to go unanswered is to be complicit by our inaction. The actions of the judge in this case were appropriate and wholly proper. It is the duty of the district attorney to evaluate their case and determine if they have sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction at trial. It is also a legal, constitutional and ethical obligation of prosecutors to disclose all exculpatory evidence to the defense. Having done this it is then a decision they must make as to the viability of their case for trial.
Often cases change over time and witnesses choose not to testify or may be unavailable for a number of reasons. Additional evidence becomes available and renders a case less appealing to a jury or more difficult to succeed in and then a prosecutor has to make a decision of what is best for the victim of a crime and the furtherance of justice. A review of the transcript in the present case shows that the judge made inquiries of the prosecutor regarding the plea agreement and also had input from a separate attorney representing the interests of the victim and her family. Without any objection from anyone involved in the case the judge followed what is a reasonable and prudent course of action and accepted the plea offered by the district attorney.
I must assume the district attorney in this case made the decision to offer this plea after consultation with the victim, her family and review of the strengths and weaknesses of the case. To criticize the entire process and attempt to have a chilling effect on judges throughout the state cannot be allowed to proceed and it is for that reason that after discussions with the board of directors of the OCDLA that I felt it was imperative to respond to these attacks on the Oklahoma judiciary.
For clarification neither I, nor the board of directors of OCDLA is doing this in agreement with or at the specific request of any judicial officer in this state. This is solely due to our concern that the rights and freedoms of all of the citizens of Oklahoma are at stake if the independence of the judiciary is allowed to become a political pawn and to help ensure that everyone understands the need to maintain three separate and distinct branches of government. It would be a sad day for this state if we allowed the legislature to intimidate the very professional and ethical judges we are privileged to have in Oklahoma.
Although the members of OCDLA may not agree with every decision made by each and every judge in this state, we must support the decisions made in this case as there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by this judge. We support the rights of all to freedom of speech and peaceful discourse but must also stand firm against uninformed and unwarranted attacks on the very fabric of a free society, that being an independent judiciary free from political or partisan pressure.
Albert J. Hoch, Jr.
President, OCDLA
An interesting case we see with some regularity anymore. Confirmation bias is a real thing and very much prevalent, despite good intentions. To me, this article plainly shows the necessity for warrants to be mandatory in these cases; common sense and law should always trump panic!
“The downside of society’s increased awareness that bad things happen to children is an increased tendency to see those bad things everywhere.”
WASHINGTONPOST.COM
How an Arizona couple’s innocent bath-time photos of their kids set off a 10-year legal saga
Oklahoma F-Warriors is with Charles Richardson and 4 others.
January 22, 2018 at 5:47 PM ·
Please join us for Taste of TLC on March 2, 2018 and please Like and Share
RSVP to ok.tlc.lwg@gmail.com
#OklahomaFWarriors #TrialLawyersCollege
Oklahoma F-Warriors
January 12, 2018 at 5:58 PM ·
Oklahoma F-warriors, tired of the ice cold weather? Join TLC in February in sunny Jupiter, Florida for a great Opening Statement regional. Seats are nearly sold out. Register today!
If you have any questions contact Jacqui Ford
