|
|
 |
RailRoaded |
|
| Home |
Enclosure # 3 – Page 1 Grievance Narrative In February 2007 I hired Mr. Charles Roberts to defend my son, Robert Smith against false charges of sexual assault of a minor. By the time I realized that he was not going to do what I hired him to do, I had no money left to hire another lawyer. I did not keep records of ‘dates and times’ but the following are the grievances that I have against Charles Roberts. At first Mr. Roberts talked about delaying the trial but eventually going to trial and winning. After I finished paying his fee he began trying to convince my son to plead guilty. He talked about life in prison and how you can not trust judges and juries. He never fully explained the consequences of pleading guilty to false charges of sexual assault. In February 2009 when the case was two years old the District Attorney said they found child pornography in the items they had seized when my son was arrested. They said they would not file additional charges if my son would plead guilty to the original charges. I had already told Mr. Roberts that the search warrant was illegal but he said no judge in El Paso would agree with me. I did not press the issue at that time because we knew that there could be no ‘evidence’ in the items they took. But after the threat of charges of possession of child pornography I felt that the issue should be resolved. I wrote Mr. Roberts a letter (Enc. # 04) explaining again that the search warrant was illegal. I am enclosing a copy of the search warrant (Enc. # 05) and the supporting affidavit (Enc. # 06). I do not believe that Mr. Roberts read the letter. At the next meeting with Mr. Roberts I tried to discuss it and he said it did not matter and would not discuss it. Thereafter, he did not allow me to sit in on the meetings with my son. I paid a $2500 trial fee which I thought was for spending time in the court room during the trial. The contract says it is for preparing for trial. Mr. Roberts never prepared for trial. He never read the police report; if he had, he would have seen an easy defense. He would have only had to point out the lies to the district attorney. He never interviewed any of the witnesses. He asked my son for a list of character witnesses and then never interviewed them. My son’s best friend gave a statement to the police but Mr. Roberts never interviewed him. Mr. Roberts never returned calls. The standard response from his office was, “You need to stay calm and let us do our job”. Actually they never did their job. He was always late to hearings and sometimes he never showed up. I guess he handled it by phone because after waiting a couple of hours in the hall the bailiff would come to get my son to sign papers. Mr. Roberts finally convinced my son to plead guilty and a plea hearing was held October 15, 2009. Mr. Roberts had another attorney appear for my son. Mr. Roberts Enclosure # 3 – Page 2 Grievance Narrative stopped by just long enough to tell my son that he was still his lawyer and he should call if he had questions or concerns. After that Mr. Roberts returned one call and told my son that he was trying to get his possessions back. I was very unhappy with Mr. Roberts’ representation of my son and the plea deal. I wrote a letter to the judge, Sam Medrano, Jr., and sent copies to Mr. Roberts and many others including the Texas State Bar. Mr. Roberts called my son and laughed about the letter. He said it would not do any good. On March 8, 2010 I sent a letter to Mr. Roberts asking for a refund of $2500 and that he file a petition with the court to ask for the return of my son’s possessions (Enc. # 7). I asked that he respond by March 20. He received the letter on March 10 but as of now I have had no response. Mr. Roberts did two things for my son. He got the bond reduced to a manageable amount and he got a copy of the police report for us. But he also advised my son to not answer a petition for a protective order nor hire a civil attorney. Because he did not appear at the hearing, my son could not tell the court that his wife and children had not lived in the home for six months nor point out that the alleged abuse had not occurred in the last three years. Because of that protective order my son lost his possessions and his home because it was within 200 yards of where his wife was living with her parents so he could not go back there after he was released from jail. I had asked Mr. Roberts to refund the $2500 trial fee. Now I believe he should return the entire fee if not more. My son has been harmed by the actions and inactions of Mr. Roberts. My husband and I as well as the rest of our family have been harmed. Our judicial system has been harmed. We have begun to believe that Mr. Roberts made a deal with the District Attorney – to give up my son in exchange for another client. If that is not the case than Mr. Roberts is grossly incompetent to handle cases of the complexity of a sexual assault charge – especially if the accused is innocent. Respectfully, Carrie Smith
|
|
| Letter | ||
| Reader Comments | ||
| Interesting Stories | ||
| UpDates | ||
|
How It Works Coming Soon |
||
Send mail to carries@elp.rr.com
|
You are visitor number
|