-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Anybody Know What's Going On With Danbus?
- Thread starter Neplusultra
- Start date
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
No offense, Danbus, but what about all the cases where the trial court mademistakes that were overturned on appeal?
Or more precisely, the appeals based on lower court mistakes where the appellate court refused to consider the point appealled because the appellant failed to raise the objection in the lower court?
I'm not a lawyer. As I understand it, if the lower court makes a mistake--for whatever reason, perhaps even prejudice against guns--and you don't knowwhat mistake has been made, and thus fail to raise the appropriate objection during the lower court proceedings,you lose the opportunity to appeal on that point.
I'd go with the public defender, and spend a lot of time making sure he understands and is going to execute the strategy.Bug him to death about process and procedural errors the court can make and howhe would handle it. You can always ask for a postponement and a different public defender if the one you get seems disinterested, unenergetic, etc.
No offense, Danbus, but what about all the cases where the trial court mademistakes that were overturned on appeal?
Or more precisely, the appeals based on lower court mistakes where the appellate court refused to consider the point appealled because the appellant failed to raise the objection in the lower court?
I'm not a lawyer. As I understand it, if the lower court makes a mistake--for whatever reason, perhaps even prejudice against guns--and you don't knowwhat mistake has been made, and thus fail to raise the appropriate objection during the lower court proceedings,you lose the opportunity to appeal on that point.
I'd go with the public defender, and spend a lot of time making sure he understands and is going to execute the strategy.Bug him to death about process and procedural errors the court can make and howhe would handle it. You can always ask for a postponement and a different public defender if the one you get seems disinterested, unenergetic, etc.
sjhipple
Regular Member
imported post
Citizen, you're right about the cases being overturned on other grounds, but it should be stated in the case WHY the court is ruling the way it is. If Dan reads the cases carefully, I think he'll be ok.
Also, public defender rarely will "execute" any strategy. They've got a case load that gives them about 15 minutes TOPS per client and all they do is stand there and look nice. Rarely do they spend time on their "clients."
I think a better way to go would be for him to share the cases he has with you and others on this board with experience (not out in the open of course, but through PM). I think that would be more helpful
To all the naysayers, your nay saying isn't helping anything. I think Dan's got a shot as long as he does his homework, and it seems that he has.
Citizen, you're right about the cases being overturned on other grounds, but it should be stated in the case WHY the court is ruling the way it is. If Dan reads the cases carefully, I think he'll be ok.
Also, public defender rarely will "execute" any strategy. They've got a case load that gives them about 15 minutes TOPS per client and all they do is stand there and look nice. Rarely do they spend time on their "clients."
I think a better way to go would be for him to share the cases he has with you and others on this board with experience (not out in the open of course, but through PM). I think that would be more helpful
To all the naysayers, your nay saying isn't helping anything. I think Dan's got a shot as long as he does his homework, and it seems that he has.
sjhipple
Regular Member
imported post
LEO 229 wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
A man who says "his self" doesn't know grammar.
Ghettokracker71
Regular Member
imported post
ama-gi wrote:
ama-gi wrote:
:lol: Nice.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
ama-gi wrote:
But,doesn't this assume the trial court will be carefully impartial and will follow process to the letter, even if the prosecution doesn't? And then will render a decision based only on statute and precedent?
ama-gi wrote:
But,doesn't this assume the trial court will be carefully impartial and will follow process to the letter, even if the prosecution doesn't? And then will render a decision based only on statute and precedent?
imported post
Ghettokracker71 wrote:
What is so "nice" about it?
Oh... nice that you have some reason to bash another member here.. I get it.
I will be the first to tell you that my spelling and grammar sucks! That is no secret. We are all different in our own way.
Ghettokracker71 wrote:
What is so "nice" about it?
Oh... nice that you have some reason to bash another member here.. I get it.
I will be the first to tell you that my spelling and grammar sucks! That is no secret. We are all different in our own way.
Ghettokracker71
Regular Member
imported post
LEO 229 wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
Lol, I'm a college student and my grammar sucks too. I wasn't dissing you personally, it just was funny what ama-gi wrote, lol.
imported post
put up or shut up.
if you ppl wanna give db sh*t b/c he is choosing to represent himself, before you do so how about thowing down some$$$ to offset his legal expences? otherwise, i get the impression he doesnt give a damn what you think about whether he needs a lawyer or not.
put up or shut up.
if you ppl wanna give db sh*t b/c he is choosing to represent himself, before you do so how about thowing down some$$$ to offset his legal expences? otherwise, i get the impression he doesnt give a damn what you think about whether he needs a lawyer or not.
sjhipple
Regular Member
imported post
Lou_Sanderson wrote:
+1
Like I said, I think Dan will be fine because he seems to have done his homework. I do think that having Citizen and others who know the law here take a look at his cases and make sure his case is well-researched would be great.
Lou_Sanderson wrote:
+1
Like I said, I think Dan will be fine because he seems to have done his homework. I do think that having Citizen and others who know the law here take a look at his cases and make sure his case is well-researched would be great.
Ghettokracker71
Regular Member
imported post
I don't see any links to donate money on:celebrate
I don't see any links to donate money on:celebrate
sjhipple
Regular Member
imported post
nova wrote:
Oh you can make fun all you want. Just don't call us next time some criminal comes knocking on your door splitting infinitives and spewing unconjugated verbs! Take care of it yourself! We'll see how useful your speak and spell is then.
nova wrote:
Oh you can make fun all you want. Just don't call us next time some criminal comes knocking on your door splitting infinitives and spewing unconjugated verbs! Take care of it yourself! We'll see how useful your speak and spell is then.
Neplusultra
Regular Member
imported post
Citizen wrote:
I think I might agree with you Citizen. It's not bad to have a lawyer, especially if someone else is paying for him. But you'd have to be sure he believes staunchly in the second and that he is with the agenda.
But I'm sure Danbus knows what he's doing. Don't let the nay saying upset you (edit: I meant Danbus, oops was that some sort of grammatical error?). If you know you are in the right from your study of the law and case law then be confident. But be honest, if you're unsure then most certainly talk to the PD.
Citizen wrote:
I think I might agree with you Citizen. It's not bad to have a lawyer, especially if someone else is paying for him. But you'd have to be sure he believes staunchly in the second and that he is with the agenda.
But I'm sure Danbus knows what he's doing. Don't let the nay saying upset you (edit: I meant Danbus, oops was that some sort of grammatical error?). If you know you are in the right from your study of the law and case law then be confident. But be honest, if you're unsure then most certainly talk to the PD.
kimbercarrier
Campaign Veteran
imported post
ama-gi wrote:
ama-gi wrote:
ROTFLMAO:lol:nova wrote:
Oh you can make fun all you want. Just don't call us next time some criminal comes knocking on your door splitting infinitives and spewing unconjugated verbs! Take care of it yourself! We'll see how useful your speak and spell is then.
paramedic70002
Regular Member
imported post
I'm a little out of the loop.
Are you going to let the judge try the case at that time or will you request a jury trial be scheduled at a future date?
If you're found guilty with jail time or a big fine will you register an immediate appeal to avoid/defer being jailed?
Dec 28 in Suffolk criminal court? I might be able to come. What time?
I'm a little out of the loop.
Are you going to let the judge try the case at that time or will you request a jury trial be scheduled at a future date?
If you're found guilty with jail time or a big fine will you register an immediate appeal to avoid/defer being jailed?
Dec 28 in Suffolk criminal court? I might be able to come. What time?
danbus
Regular Member
imported post
paramedic70002 wrote:
10 AM
paramedic70002 wrote:
10 AM
sjhipple
Regular Member
imported post
paramedic70002 wrote:
paramedic70002 wrote:
In Virginia, all non-felonies are tried first in the General District Court without a jury in front of a judge. If you win there, the case is over. If you lose, you can appeal to the Circuit Court where you can choose to be tried by a judge or by a jury.
TEX1N
Regular Member
imported post
ama-gi wrote:
Good luck!
ama-gi wrote:
I was just about to say that! And it's actually not an appeal, but rather a trial de novo, or basically a new trial before the Circuit Court. Therefore, if you lose in General District Court while representing yourself pro se, you would have the option to request a lawyer for the trial de novo, if you wanted to.
Good luck!