Judge puts retrial idea to bed { Sleepy Lawyer }

Memphis Commercial Appeal ^ | 6/7/7 | Lawrence Buser

[SmithL]

A lawyer who asked for a new murder trial for his client because the long hours in court made him too sleepy got a wake-up call Wednesday from the judge: No new trial.

Defense attorney Charles R. Curbo had argued recently that he was not effective in his defense of client Tony Wolfe because his six-day trial in January went until 10 or 11 p.m. most nights.

On three of those days, court did not start until 1 p.m. because Wolfe needed morning dialysis treatments. On the other days, court began at 10 a.m.

A 1976 Tennessee appeals court ruling awarded a new trial in another case when a defense attorney said he was ineffective because long hours in court -- 9 a.m. to 1 a.m. -- wore them out.

Criminal Court Judge John Colton Jr., however, said the hours of the Wolfe trial were reasonable under the circumstances.

"In (the 1976 case), the trial hours, which were deemed to be reversible error, lasted upwards of 19 hours," he wrote, "whereas in the present case a trial day never lasted beyond 13 hours, and the parties were provided with frequent recesses."

Colton also rejected Curbo's other arguments for a new trial, including a claim that the attorney sometimes lost focus on his case because the judge criticized him for what were deemed to be improper questions or irrelevant arguments.

"Defense counsel undermined his own argument here when he testified (later) that he was not intimidated by much of anything," Colton said in his 14-page opinion. "Even if defense counsel was capable of being intimidated, a lack of concentration resulting from a court's authority to reasonably control the proceedings conducted in its courtroom will not result in a reversible error."

Wolfe, 26, was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting 27-year-old Leondus Hawkins in the head and the right leg on Sept. 11, 2004, on a service station parking lot at 1335 S. Bellevue. He was sentenced to life in prison.

[muawiyah]

Notice that neither the judge nor the lawyer were at all concerned that the accused, Mr. Wolfe, might well have a serious physical disability that probably should have ruled out 13 hour days in court.

Gad ~ I think this violated the Americans With Disability Act.

(This judge was holding the trial on the same day the defendant had to have dialysis.)

[LaineyDee]

(This judge was holding the trial on the same day the defendant had to have dialysis.)

Most people who are on dialysis have to do it 3 days a week...every other day. What do you suppose the solution would be?

[middie]

the trial judge is a first class jerk. A fair trial does not include an endurance march or marathon to get to the end. He’ll get reversed; properly so.

[muawiyah]

Schedule the court to meet on this case on the fellow’s off-days, or maybe simply convene at the dialysis clinic.