Blog
Clients often wait to retain us until they are actually indicted. Many times, however, had the client come to us when they first became aware they were under criminal investigation they might have avoided indictment all together or, at least, been in a better position to defend themselves once they were indicted. Just as it…
Federal prosecutors are prosecuting child pornography offenses at an astounding rate both here in the Northern District of Texas and throughout the country. Because of Broden & Micklesen’s reputation as one of the preeminent federal criminal defense firms in the United States, we were recently hired to represent the husband of an FBI agent who…
A potential client came to see me the other day. The potential client was charged in federal court with possession and distribution of child pornography. When the potential client called me to set up the appointment, it was clear that he did not have much money. He was being represented by a Federal Public Defender…
There are many Texas attorneys who advertise that they will “serve as both your bail bond agent (bondsman) and your attorney” and that they provide “competitive rates” for bail bonds that can later be applied to legal fees. Never Hire an Attorney that will also be your Bail Bondsman We strongly recommend that you NEVER…
In rare cases in federal court, it is possible to make the government pay for a wrongful prosecution. On November 26, 1997, Congress passed the Hyde Amendment which provides that if a defendant prevails in a prosecution brought in federal court and the court finds that the prosecution was “vexatious, frivolous or in bad faith,”…
On May 26, 2009, the Supreme Court handed down another important decision pertaining to Constitutional procedure. Almost everyone is familiar with “Miranda” rights. These are the warnings that police give suspects upon arrest. They are derived from the Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. Miranda, in which the Supreme Court held that suspects are entitled…
On April 21, 2009, the Supreme Court decided Arizona v. Gant. The issue in this case was whether the fact the police made an arrest of the driver automatically gave them the right to search his car. In New York v. Belton , decided in 1981, the Supreme Court had created a “bright line” rule…
On Wednesday January 14, in the case of Herring v. United States, the Supreme Court further signaled its hostility to the exclusionary rule. The exclusionary rule is the rule that does not permit state or federal prosecutors to use evidence against defendants that was acquired in violation of the law or the Constitution. Many people…
The Rights You Deserve and Can Expect to Receive You have a right to expect several things from any criminal lawyer you hire with the understanding that, like many things in life, you often get what you pay for. To further complicate the matter, there are lawyers who charge absurdly large fees and provide no…
On December 10, 2008, the Court of Criminal Appeals (the Texas Supreme Court for Criminal Cases), in a case that I argued, handed down a decision reversing the lower court. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is arguably the most unfriendly appellate court for criminal defendants in the country, so anytime a defendant wins in…