How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Lawmoe Your Own Question
Lawmoe, Criminal Defense Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 2415
Experience:  More than 19 years of experience as a Criminal Defense Lawyer
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Lawmoe is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have a hearing and adjudicatory coming up for a felony and

Resolved Question:

I have a hearing and adjudicatory coming up for a felony and misdemeanor false pretenses case, respectively. I have retained a local lawyer, but it seems that nothing in my case is being done so far, except for discovery which returned rather meager results. In fact, the discovery only returned a brief summary of evidence, instead of complete evidence. The discovery did not show written witness statements, which I know they have. I was wondering what are the consequences of adding another lawyer to my case, mainly for reassurance? Would the prosecution view it as the behavior of a guilty person? Would it make me look guilty? My current lawyer is OK with working with another lawyer, but says that I don't need another one, but can hire one just for reassurance. The charges allege retail fraud, and I am searching for a lawyer who has dealt in such specific cases, but being unable to find one, I used to find some of the best rated lawyers and was wondering if thats a good way?
Submitted: 7 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  Lawmoe replied 7 years ago.

Adding another attorney to the case would be, first of all, costly, and, second, would require agreement and cooperation between two attorneys. Ultimately, too many cooks in the kitchen who are not on the same page could produce a more disjointed defense. I also believe that you would have a hard time finding a lawyer who wants to play the role of looking over a colleague's shoulder.


If you are not comfortable with what has happened to date, schedule a meeting to sit down with your lawyer, express your concerns and together plot out a game plane with deadlines for critical motions. This would, of course, include a motion to compel discovery if that discovery is still outstanding.


If, after your meeting or subsequently, you remain uncomfortable with your lawyer's performance, it is time for a change. You would be better served retaining a new lawyer than wondering "what if" while sitting in jail.


The prosecutor would not care one way or another. It does not affect the evidence in the case or how it is viewed by the prosecutor. It most certainly does not lend itself to an appearance of guilt. It simply suggests that you are exercising your constitutional rights.


To find a lawyer, interview several. Different lawyers have different styles and you must be comfortable with your lawyer's individual style. I would never suggest choosing a lawyer based on an artificial rating from a website and I say that as a member on the AVVO website.



Customer: replied 7 years ago.
Thank you. The logic behind my reasoning in choosing two lawyers was that one is local, and frequents the courthouse where I'll be tried, hence would come in useful if we needed to reach a plea agreement. However, I'm not sure if they like litigation as much as plea agreements, hence I'd like to choose a lawyer who spends much time in litigation. In essence, I want to cover both a favorable plea agreement by having an attorney who is familiar with the judges and prosecutors at that courthouse, and one from outside that jurisdiction (but still in the same state) who has a reputation for aggressive litigation. This is a facts-based case, with no legal principle being argued. Is my logic in choosing two lawyers reasonable? or should I choose one?
Expert:  Lawmoe replied 7 years ago.

I would choose one and stick with it. An aggressive presentation of a defense with motions and pretrial discussions generally is more effective in assuaging a favorable plea than being passive and knowing the prosecutor. All you require is one good one.


Lawmoe and 2 other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you