Posts Tagged :

lawyer

The Reality of Legal Representation in the U.S.A.

 150 150 vprxncte
By:
0

“Racism and classism are a manifestation of a culture that has no genuine morals and can only elevate itself by subjugating others.”

Shahid K. Bolsen

Introduction

The United States prides itself on being a nation of laws, where justice is a fundamental pillar of society. However, for millions of people, this ideal is far from reality. With over 2.5 million individuals incarcerated in state and federal prisons, the American criminal justice system seems to be more of an industry of profit rather than a beacon of justice. This situation begs the question: Are lawyers truly fighting for the legal and constitutional rights of their clients, or is their advocacy driven primarily by personal gain?

The Role of Lawyers: Ideals vs. Reality

Lawyers are often seen as the defenders of justice, the ones who stand up for the oppressed and ensure that everyone receives a fair trial. This is the idealistic view that many people hold, inspired by courtroom dramas and the noble image of legal warriors. However, the reality is more complex and, often, disheartening.

In practice, many lawyers are motivated by financial incentives rather than a pure dedication to justice. This is not to say that all lawyers are indifferent to their clients’ rights, but the system itself encourages a focus on profit. Legal fees, billable hours, and the potential for lucrative settlements can sometimes overshadow the fundamental mission of defending constitutional rights. The prison population is also a direct reflection of what lawyers in the United States is doing and not doing.

The Profit-Driven Justice System

The staggering number of incarcerated individuals in the United States highlights a systemic issue. The criminal justice system, including its legal representatives, often operates as a business. From private prisons that benefit from high incarceration rates to legal professionals who may prioritize high-paying cases, the focus can shift from justice to profitability.

The situation becomes even more dire when considering public defenders. These lawyers, who are supposed to represent those who cannot afford private counsel, are often overworked and underpaid. With excessive caseloads and limited resources, public defenders may struggle to provide the vigorous defense that every defendant deserves. This imbalance leads to a higher likelihood of plea deals and wrongful convictions, contributing to the swelling prison population.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics

Personal Experience: A Case Study in Systemic Failure

My own experience underscores the flaws in the system. Wrongfully convicted and imprisoned, I encountered a legal landscape where my constitutional rights were outright overlooked. My case was not unique; countless others face similar injustices, trapped in a system that seems more concerned with maintaining its own mechanisms than ensuring fair treatment for all. My case also gives indisputable proof that the State wins cases on technicalities and not merits, with the system itself engaged in concerted actions to protect itself, completely denying you justice.

Throughout my ordeal, it became evident that many lawyers are selective in their battles, often influenced by the potential for personal gain. This selective advocacy means that those without substantial financial resources or high-profile cases may receive subpar representation, perpetuating cycles of injustice and incarceration.

“The American Criminal Justice system has a well-known history of ignoring facts and relying on prejudice.”

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

10 Eye-Opening Facts About Criminal Justice

1) Mass Incarceration: There are currently over 2 million people incarcerated in the U.S., and an additional 5 million under correctional supervision (on probation or parole).

2) Race: People of color are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. Applying 1996 incarceration rates, the lifetime chances of spending time behind bars is 1 in 4 for African-American males; 1 in 6 for Latino males; and 1 in 23 for white males.

3) Poverty: The majority of people in prison are poor-60% of women and 40% of men in U.S. State prisons were unemployed before their arrest. 

4) Gender: The rates of incarceration for women in New York State increased by about 500% between 1974 and 2004 (more than double the rate of increase for men). The lifetime chances of going to prison are six times as high for African-American women as for white women. 

5) Drugs: A 1997 survey of State prison inmates revealed that a third committed their offense while under the influence of drugs.

6) Families: Most people who are incarcerated are parents–75% of incarcerated women are mothers; 66% of incarcerated men are fathers. Ten million children in the U.S. have a parent who is currently or was recently under some form of criminal justice supervision (incarcerated, or on probation, or parole).

7) Youth & Juvenile Justice: In 2003, 112,000 young people were in juvenile institutions nationwide, mostly for property offenses.

8) Displaced Resources: The U.S. Census counts prisoners as part of a prison county’s population–rather than as residents of the communities they originated from. Federal resources and political representation are granted based on population, so this practice displaces needed resources and political representation away from already struggling communities to the mostly rural areas that “house” prisoners. 

9) Profits: Contracts for other services-such as security technology, vending machines, and products sold at elevated prices at the “commissary,” where prisoners buy toiletries, food, and other necessities-also generate profits.

10) Voter Disenfranchisement: In most states, those convicted of felony crimes are barred from voting for a period of time after their release; in some States, they are banned for life. 

Source: Barry Chaffkin & Tanya Krupat , Coalition 2007 Conference Presentation

A Call for Change

The American criminal justice system needs a profound transformation. Lawyers should be advocates for justice, not merely participants in a profit-driven industry. This shift requires systemic changes, including better funding and support for public defenders, reforms in sentencing laws, and a reevaluation of the incentives that drive legal practice.

We must also hold legal professionals accountable, ensuring that they uphold their duty to fight for their clients’ legal and constitutional rights. Advocacy should not be a selective process based on potential rewards but a consistent commitment to justice for all.

Conclusion

The over 2.5 million people incarcerated in the United States serve as a testament to a system in dire need of reform. Lawyers play a crucial role in this system, and their motivations can significantly impact outcomes. It is time to move away from a profit-driven approach and towards a model of legal representation that genuinely prioritizes justice, fairness, and the protection of constitutional rights. Only then can we begin to address the deep-seated issues that plague our criminal justice system and ensure that it serves all individuals equitably.

Until Next Time…

I Am,

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

Dwane Cates: P.O.S. Attorney 2

 150 150 vprxncte
By:
0

Introduction

In my relentless pursuit of justice, it is imperative to highlight the misconduct and legal violations committed by my former attorney, Dwane Cates. This blog post will detail the specific laws and professional rules he broke during his representation of my case and trial. Understanding these violations is crucial, not just for my case, but for anyone seeking justice and fair representation.

State Bar of Arizona Professional Rules of Conduct Violations

  1. Rule 1.1 – Competence
    • Dwane Cates failed to provide competent representation by not adequately preparing for my defense. His lack of preparation and understanding of the complexities of my case led to inadequate representation, violating Rule 1.1, which requires lawyers to provide competent representation to their clients.
  2. Rule 1.3 – Diligence
    • Rule 1.3 mandates that a lawyer must act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client. Cates neglected important aspects of my case, including failing to investigate key evidence and witnesses that could have exonerated me, thus failing to meet this standard of diligence. He filed no motions in my case on my behalf whatsoever.
  3. Rule 1.4 – Communication
    • Effective communication is critical in legal representation. Cates violated Rule 1.4 by failing to keep me informed about the status of my case and not explaining legal matters in a manner that allowed me to make informed decisions.
  4. Rule 1.7 – Conflict of Interest
    • Rule 1.7 prohibits a lawyer from representing a client if there is a significant risk that the lawyer’s interests or other clients’ interests will materially limit their ability to represent the client. Cates had undisclosed conflicts of interest that compromised his ability to represent me impartially and effectively.

American Bar Association (ABA) Rules Violations

  1. Rule 3.1 – Meritorious Claims and Contentions
    • The ABA Rule 3.1 requires that a lawyer should not bring or defend a proceeding unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous. Cates pursued defenses and arguments without a solid factual basis, wasting valuable resources and undermining my defense.
  2. Rule 8.4 – Misconduct
    • This rule prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. Cates’s actions, including misrepresenting facts and failing to disclose crucial information, clearly violate this rule.

Federal Laws and Constitutional Violations

  1. Sixth Amendment – Right to Effective Assistance of Counsel
    • The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to effective assistance of counsel. Cates’s inadequate preparation, lack of communication, and conflicts of interest resulted in ineffective assistance, directly violating my constitutional rights under the Sixth Amendment.

State Rules of Court Violations

  1. Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 15 – Disclosure and Discovery
    • Rule 15 requires timely disclosure of evidence by both the prosecution and defense. Cates failed to utilize discovery rules effectively, neglecting to obtain exculpatory evidence that could have been crucial to my defense.

Attorney Dwane Cates evinces ineptitude, inadequacy, and incompetence, by a complete and total failure, and looked as if he did not even bother to investigate the State’s case and star witness, Jamil Trevon Curd (JTC), who was arrested 10 times before this case, with at least 25 Phoenix Police Department Incident reports of residential burglary, aggravated assaults, dui, domestic violence, criminal damage, disorderly conduct, 5 arrest warrants, and a pending investigation into the death of Royce Emmett Walker on May 21, 2015. 

“5 arrest warrants, and a pending investigation into the death of Royce Emmett Walker on May 21, 2015 was concealed by Deputy County Attorney Lori Eidemanis of the Maricopa County Attorney Office (MCAO). Dwane Cates failed in his duties completely.”

Ewing redmond Samuels III

The State of Arizona’s case against me was largely constructed on Detective Marchele Miller‘s report, which was rife with omissions and deliberate falsehoods. Despite possessing facts that could have demonstrated my innocence, Miller chose to suppress this crucial information, thereby distorting the narrative and fabricating evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion of guilt. Her actions not only tainted the integrity of the investigation but also played a significant role in the wrongful conviction that followed, highlighting a grave miscarriage of justice. Marchele Miller was arrested on February 23, 2012 by the Chandler Police Department.

Attorney Dwane Cates did not obtain this information to challenge the veracity and truthfulness of her statements at trial and the report she authored, filled with deliberate falsehoods that was easy to refute with facts and evidence. He allowed the word of a corrupt Detective to violate an individual with high government security clearance as a Cyber Security Expert and Analyst.

“Detective Marchele Miller was arrested on February 23, 2012 by the Chandler Police Department.”

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

Federal Statutes and Case Law

  1. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)
    • This landmark case sets the standard for determining ineffective assistance of counsel. According to Strickland, a defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. Cates’s actions meet both prongs of this test, as his incompetence and neglect clearly impacted the outcome of my case.
  2. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)
    • Under Brady, the prosecution is required to disclose evidence favorable to the defendant. While this is a prosecutorial duty, Cates failed to demand such disclosures aggressively, a failure that compromised my defense.

Conclusion

Attorney Dwane Cates’s conduct during my case and trial was a clear breach of numerous professional and legal standards. His violations of the State Bar of Arizona Professional Rules of Conduct, American Bar Association Rules, Federal Laws, State Rules of Court, and critical case laws such as Strickland and Brady, resulted in the gross miscarriage of justice I experienced. It is my hope that by exposing these violations, I can not only seek redress for myself but also warn others of the potential pitfalls in their pursuit of justice.

Call to Action

I urge those who have faced similar injustices to come forward and share their stories. Together, we can push for accountability and reform within the legal system. For more detailed information and updates on my case, please visit my website regularly.

Until Next Time…

I Am,

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

Dwane Cates: P.O.S. Attorney

 150 150 vprxncte
By:
0

An Incompetent Defense and a Conspiracy Against Rights

In the complex and often harsh world of the legal system, the importance of competent legal representation cannot be overstated. Unfortunately, in my case—State of Arizona vs. Ewing Samuels—the very cornerstone of justice was undermined by the ineptitude and incompetence of my attorney, Dwane Cates. His ineffective assistance did not just fall short of acceptable legal standards; it actively contributed to a miscarriage of justice, supported by evidence of collusion with Lori Eidemanis and the Maricopa County Attorney Office.

Dwane Cates: A Breach of Duty

When I was accused of a crime I did not commit, I placed my trust in Dwane Cates, hoping for a robust defense that would uphold my rights and deliver justice. However, throughout the trial, it became evident that Cates failed to meet the basic obligations of his role:

  1. Lack of Preparation: From the outset, Cates demonstrated a severe lack of preparation. He failed to investigate crucial evidence that could have proven my innocence and neglected to interview key witnesses whose testimonies would have been pivotal.
  2. Inadequate Legal Strategy: His legal strategy, if it can be called that, was riddled with errors and glaring omissions. He did not file necessary motions that could have challenged the prosecution’s evidence or highlighted procedural errors, thereby failing to protect my constitutional rights.
  3. Poor Communication: Throughout the proceedings, Cates maintained poor communication with me. Important decisions were made without my input or understanding, leaving me uninformed and unable to participate meaningfully in my own defense.
  4. Criminal Conduct: Dwane Cates had personally asked me to ask JTC’s mother Alisa Michelle Hudson for him to ‘go away’ or leave the State until after the case is over when I met with him at his office on 1747 E. Morten, Suite 205. Phoenix, Arizona 85020 in 2016. I was shocked and looked at him like he lost his mind.
  5. Absolutely No Investigation Into The Facts Thereof: A simple background check into the state’s witness would have shown:

“The State’s case was built on the word of an individual, JTC, who was arrested 10 times before this case, with at least 25 Phoenix Police Department Incident reports, 5 arrest warrants, and a pending investigation into the death of Royce Emmett Walker on May 21, 2015. All concealed by Deputy County Attorney Lori Eidemanis. Dwane Cates representation is questionable all around.”

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

The State’s case was built on the word of an individual, JTC, who was arrested 10 times before this case, with at least 25 Phoenix Police Department Incident reports of residential burglary, aggravated assaults, dui, domestic violence, criminal damage, disorderly conduct, 5 arrest warrants, and a pending investigation into the death of Royce Emmett Walker on May 21, 2015. None of these items were even mentioned in trial, yet the prosecution did its best to impugn my background, even though I was never arrested nor had any criminal history prior to this so called ‘criminal case’. Dwane Cates representation is questionable all around.

“The prosecution (Deputy County Attorney Lori Eidemanis of MCAO) did its best to impugn my background, even though I was never arrested nor had any criminal history prior to this so called ‘criminal case’.”

Ewing Redmond Samuels III

The State of Arizona’s case against me was largely constructed on Detective Marchele Miller‘s report, which was rife with omissions and deliberate falsehoods. Despite possessing facts that could have demonstrated my innocence, Miller chose to suppress this crucial information, thereby distorting the narrative and fabricating evidence to fit a predetermined conclusion of guilt. Her actions not only tainted the integrity of the investigation but also played a significant role in the wrongful conviction that followed, highlighting a grave miscarriage of justice. Marchele Miller was arrestedon February 23, 2012 by the Chandler Police Department.

This report is filled of her racism, deception, propensity for dishonesty, violence, and immoral behavior.

“The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel, and the benchmark for judging any claim of ineffectiveness must be whether counsel’s conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result.”

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)

Evidence of Conspiracy

What is more alarming than Cates’ incompetence is the emerging evidence suggesting a deliberate conspiracy against my rights (18 U.S.C. § 241). The records indicate that Cates did not merely fail to defend me adequately but actively collaborated with the prosecution Lori Eidemanis and the Maricopa County Attorney Office to ensure a guilty verdict:

  1. Collusion with the Prosecution: There is substantial proof that Cates engaged in backdoor communications with the State Attorney’s Office, discussing strategies that were against my interests and designed to weaken my defense.
  2. Deliberate Sabotage: Specific actions taken by Cates, such as the deliberate suppression of exculpatory evidence and failure to cross-examine key prosecution witnesses effectively, strongly imply that his ineffective assistance was not merely due to incompetence but was a part of a concerted effort to ensure my conviction.
  3. Violation of Constitutional Rights: This conspiracy against rights is a severe violation of my legal and constitutional protections. The right to effective counsel is enshrined in the Sixth Amendment, and the deliberate denial of this right constitutes a grave injustice.

“The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has a long history of paying witnesses to testify and commit perjury, nondisclosure, and collusion with defense attorney’s, as they call it give me the case and I’ll throw you a bone here and there.”

Ewing R. Samuels III

The Path to Justice

The wrongful conviction and subsequent imprisonment were a direct result of Dwane Cates’ incompetence and the malicious collusion with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. This case is not just about one individual’s failure but a systemic abuse that requires accountability and redress.

Moving Forward

  1. Legal Action: I am committed to pursuing all legal avenues to overturn this unjust conviction and to hold those responsible accountable for their actions. This includes filing for post-conviction relief based on the ineffective assistance of counsel and exploring civil actions for the conspiracy against my rights.
  2. Public Awareness: Sharing my story is crucial. By exposing the details of this case, I aim to shed light on the broader issues within the justice system, advocating for reforms that will prevent others from suffering similar fates.
  3. Advocacy for Reform: My experience underscores the need for systemic changes. Advocacy for stricter oversight of legal counsel performance and greater transparency within prosecutorial conduct is essential to protect the rights of all individuals.

Conclusion

The ordeal I faced due to Dwane Cates’ incompetence and the malicious conspiracy against my rights is a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities within our legal system. My fight is not just for personal justice but for a more equitable system where such injustices cannot occur. Through continued legal action and raising public awareness, I am determined to seek justice and ensure that my case serves as a catalyst for necessary reforms.

To reiterate, these are not just Sixth Amendment violations, but are criminal violations under Federal laws. As they say, “no one is above the law”.

For more details about my case and ongoing efforts, please stay tuned as I dissect my case from beginning to present. Join me in advocating for justice and accountability.

Until Next Time…

I Am,

Ewing Redmond Samuels III