There is some bitterness in the Potato State.

Can you withdraw from a criminal case simply because you think the court is “lazy” and “incompetent”? I’d think “no,” otherwise defense lawyers would have a legitimate out well over 50% of the time. But one lawyer in Idaho is making the case that he should be let out of his obligations because he can’t stand the court.

There are positives with the test attorney Eric J. Scott would like to apply. Would that we could drop out of anything simply because the people we work with are lazy. But at the end of the day, it’s hard to tell if Scott is reasonably concerned that the court is too stupid to be respected, or if he’s just bummed that he’s losing….

The motion to withdraw (which we just came across yesterday, but is dated August 12th), can be boiled down to the following statement:

Such language!

Scott makes his living and practice in Boise. I wonder if you can get away with flipping off a local court like this. If he can, then the court’s general incompetence must be very well known.

Of course, there is the possibility that Scott is just a sore loser. You can read his full motion here. Scott objects to the court’s application of the Miranda test. And he is bothered by what he claims is the court’s intention on making up facts:



Well, man, that’s just like, your opinion.

Again, the most compelling evidence that Scott has a legitimate beef, as opposed to a mere difference of opinion, is the fact that he put together this motion at all. One would assume that a competent trial lawyer wouldn’t show such flagrant disrespect for his local court if he didn’t have a well-founded concern.

Otherwise, that lazy, incompetent, biased, or prejudiced label is going to whip around to be attributed to Mr. Scott’s practice really quickly.


comments sponsored by

54 comments (hidden for your protection) Show all comments