Why free him from his charges? He could have tipped the prosecution exactly the same way without actually saving his ass off from the assault charges.
If I'm not replying to you, most probably you are on ignore.
He had to do it in such a way that Louis wouldn't use the gun to implicate Mickey any more than he already was...IMO
and he got his fees by getting Louis off...
"...That's the beauty of argument, Joey. If you argue correctly, you're never wrong..."
If Mick did not put up a good defense, Louis could have grounds for a retrial and Mick could be guilty of malpractice. A defendant has a right to a vigorous defense, so a half hearted defense is grounds for retrial.
share...a half hearted defense is grounds for retrial
I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the term "ineffective assistance of counsel."
"The Supreme Court has held that part of the right to counsel is a right to effective assistance of counsel. Proving that their lawyer was ineffective at trial is a way for convicts to get their convictions overturned, and therefore ineffective assistance is a common heabus corpus claim. To prove ineffective assistance, a defendant must show (1) that their trial lawyer's performance fell below an "objective standard of reasonableness" and (2) "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ineffective_assistance_of_counsel
I'm surprised it took until '84 for a precedent
share