[Peace-discuss] Trial details

[John W.]

At 05:20 PM 7/7/2006, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

>Enough unhappiness for an appeal on ineffective assistance of counsel? I 
>gather that they're not often successful.

Not often, no.  Appellate courts have set pretty low standards for what 
constitutes "adequate" performance by an attorney, even in criminal 
trials.  But that's pretty much the only basis for an appeal, unless it can 
be shown that Patrick's Constitutional rights were violated in some 
fundamental way.  Obviously Harvey Welch wouldn't be the attorney doing the 
appeal.

Criminal trials are won and lost at the trial court level, rarely at the 
appellate level.  That's why trial preparation, and the selection of a 
proper attorney to begin with, are so important.

John Wason



>Bob Illyes wrote:
>
>>It was not argued as a police set-up. No information regarding the
>>prior felony eavesdropping case was introduced.
>>Harvey Welsh did not exactly argue that the event did not occur, but
>>rather that there was no convincing evidence that it had. Harvey failed
>>to confront Staci Rahn regarding the fact that her testimony
>>contradicted both the police report and her testimony at the prior
>>trial. I don't even recall that he noted the fact. There is a lot of
>>unhappiness regarding Harvey's performance.