Judicial system in the trenches just sucks for the poor...

[legion]

I'd be pissed if some guy showed up with my cell phone and demanded money. If I'd known that was going to happen, I would have driven to him to get the thing! It seems to me the person in question wasn't really interested in doing a good deed, but on making some money. The threatening (and actually doing) of returning the cell phone to where it was found makes this clear.

[The Gaijin]

Not so sure how the owner can be "pissed"? The owner should have gone out of his way to go pick it up.

If he had driven the 25 miles and shown up - and the finder demanded a payment - then there would be more of a case.

[m21sniper]

I can certainly understand wanting a $20 reward for a phone that potentially cost as much as 10x that amount.

The guy that had his phone returned is a total tight wadded jack ass for making such an issue out of $20.00

At the risk of sounding offensive, i'll quote the legendary mel brooks, "Even a jew would be ashamed."

[GH85Carrera]

A guy I work with saw a phone in the street at an intersection near the airport. He snagged it to and brought it to the office. We looked in the call log and it had a listing of "dad" so we called dad and told him we had found his son's phone. He asked us to bring it to him. That was not going to happen. I told the dude he can come by our office and pick it up during normal work hours. He complained that would be inconvenient for him. The son finally showed up and was very happy and polite.

[Christien]

Seems to me the dicks in this are the owner of the phone and the judge.

1. the owner should've been grateful the guy came and dropped it off for him and offered him a few bucks - I know I would've said 'hey, let me give you something for your time' and given him $10 or $20. He wouldn't have had to ask.

2. why would the judge not see it for what it is and throw the charge out, send everyone on their way home? Why are we wasting tax dollars to run a court system that actually considers a matter like this worthy of paying people to spend time to discuss?

[Gogar]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

A guy I work with saw a phone in the street at an intersection near the airport. He snagged it to and brought it to the office. We looked in the call log and it had a listing of "dad" so we called dad and told him we had found his son's phone. He asked us to bring it to him. That was not going to happen. I told the dude he can come by our office and pick it up during normal work hours. He complained that would be inconvenient for him. The son finally showed up and was very happy and polite.

I had a VERY similar story! Myself and G/F found THREE phones in the gutter while walking to dinner one summer night.

Turns out the owners of the phones (three 18-20 kids) had a "party" at their house and invited some "friends" (drug dealers) over to "hang out" (buy drugs.)

"Friends" (drug dealers) rolled the three kids and took their phones, wallets, drugs, and other stuff in the apartment. Threw the phones out a few blocks away. I found the phones.

In one of the phones I found "DAD" and called him. He got a hold of the kids and I gave them back their phones.

Problem was, this one kid had HUNDREDS. Like HUNDREDS of pics on his phone of him taking X, laying out huge lines of blow on his living room table, drinking bottles of everclear, doing more gaggin lines of blow, etc. on his phone.

I didn't tell "DAD" but I did have some common sense words for the kid when I gave him his phone back. He didn't care. I wish someone else had found the phone and given it to the cops to "return" to him.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by widgeon13

I have no sympathy for the guy, he created his own problem. If he had just given the guy his phone perhaps the guy would have thrown him a few bucks but no, he wants to play the stupid card.

bingo. He's a lowlife.

[MRM]

A couple of thoughts. First, Jim, good luck on getting out of your DWI. I'm sure it is bogus and you'll be fine, but we're pulling for you.

Second, that's an extremely harsh sentence. Up here you might get a 30 suspended sentence with credit for any time served. You'd never serve two weeks for a nonviolent petty theft.

Third, it sounds like this case had to have been prosecuted by complaint. That means the "victim" would have had to make a police report and some proescutor would have had to draft a complaint and send out a summons to black guy. I suppose the cops could have taken the information and mailed black guy a tab charge citation. Either way, up here that particular case would have been declined for prosecution. Given that the phone was lost, found, and almost but not quite returned, we would have probably considered it a civil issue and told the complaining "victim" to sue black guy. If I had taken a case like this the judges up here would have taken me aside and explained the ways of the world to me and told me never to waste their time with pieces of crap cases like that again.

And finally, this is a tough case to appeal. Finding the phone and returning it only if he got paid is probably going to cover the technical definition of theft. Since black guy has a duty to return the lost property, the issue of whether he committed a crime turns on the question of whether he discharged his duty by offering the phone delivered for $20 or to return it to the location of the loss for no money. Unless the court finds that he discharged his duty by bringing the phone back to where he found it and telling the owner where it was, the state probably has proved up each element of the offense. As I think about it though, it does sound like a decent argument that he did discharge his duty, as a matter of law, by returning the lost property to the loss location and advising the owner of where it is. That question turns on whether he has a duty to protect the property upon finding and taking possession of it. Either way, ties in appeals always go to the state, so it's a tough appeal to win.

Was the prosecutor young? Lots of young prosecutors handle every case that's technicaly a crime as aggressively as possible and do things like this until they get enough perspective to realize that isn't what prosecuting is about. If he is older and more experienced, he's just one of that kind of person who in a different time would have been all too happy to do his job to certify the death certificates for all the trainloads of irreconcilables traveling east.

[Dueller]

MRM...as I posted earlier, the DUI was thrown out on insufficiency of evidence/probable cause and the DUI refusal charge under implied consent was thrown out as the offense/arrest occurred on private property (a nuance in that implied consent statute says offense must have occurred on public roads). I made a pre-trial motion, did a brief proffer, the Judge looked at the prosecutor as if "WTF is this Mickey Mouse charge" and prosecutor caved. Took all of 3 minutes in court but I had battled the prosecutor for weeks on exculpatory evidence I had obtained (16 different store security cams that recorded the entire encounter I obtained via subpoena).

Prosecutor is a grizzled old veteran...pushing 70. I recognize the phone perp was technically wrong in not just giving the owner the phone and a piece of his mind. He tried to present his side and the judge (fairly young) helped him along a bit. The phone owner actually admitted that he had reviewed his phone useage online and there was no indication the perp had ever made a single call from the phone, that he had called the number several times and it went straight to VM, etc. Perp's story was "Look..I've never even owned a cell phone...can't afford one...had no use for one...I'm poor and a little gas money would help me out...that's all I wanted and when I asked him if he could help me out phone owner went nuts calling me a worthless N****r."

Had he had a lawyer I'm sure it never would have come to trial...a deal would have been struck to remand the charges and everybody just go home.

You're correct on the appeal problems...although it would be a trial de novo and I would think I could get it nol pross'd and get the guy outta jail.

[MRM]

Wow. In Minnesota any charge that carries the possibility of jail time requires a public defender if the defendant is indigent. PDs in the state are highly trained, well paid and very professional. They get paid off the same state pay scale as assistant DAs and they maintain their state pension if they switch offices, so there's some nice cross movement between county attorneys and PDs. I didn't like it much at first, but it didn't take me long as a young prosecutor to come to appreciate and value the PDs. They save the system a lot of money by not wasting resources on people like Phone Guy. Does that prosecutor dress up in white sheets much?

So your process is a court trial with the judge as finder of fact as the preliminary step and a trial de novo with a jury trial as the appeal? What's an appeal bond cost on a case like this? What would the procedure be from here if he wanted to post bond and perfect an appeal?

[Dueller]

Originally Posted by MRM

Wow. In Minnesota any charge that carries the possibility of jail time requires a public defender if the defendant is indigent. PDs in the state are highly trained, well paid and very professional. They get paid off the same state pay scale as assistant DAs and they maintain their state pension if they switch offices, so there's some nice cross movement between county attorneys and PDs. I didn't like it much at first, but it didn't take me long as a young prosecutor to come to appreciate and value the PDs. They save the system a lot of money by not wasting resources on people like Phone Guy. Does that prosecutor dress up in white sheets much?

So your process is a court trial with the judge as finder of fact as the preliminary step and a trial de novo with a jury trial as the appeal? What's an appeal bond cost on a case like this? What would the procedure be from here if he wanted to post bond and perfect an appeal?

30 days to file notice of appeal, appeal bond ($125 to a bail bondsman), cost deposit ($244 cost from lower court plus $120 per charge county court cost= $364 that must be posted in cash to the clerk). There are provisions to proceed in forma pauperis but it would likely take 2 weeks to get it through.

The troublesome part is if you were to take it up and the prosecutor insisted on a trial rather than a deal (which is likely given his crotchedy attitude), the appellate judge has a "trial tax"...i.e., if you've already had a trial (first bite at the apple) and you're convicted on appeal, he'll impose more severe sanctions (max fine/near max jail time or up to 6 mos in this case). As a result, in this jurisdiction I'll often "no lo" at the initial trioal to take my first bite in the appealate court.

Bit of a dilemma for me to stick my nose in this mess.

As far as PD...I think this guy waived PD and felt if he told his side of the story he would be OK....WRONG.

[Superman]

Life is like a sch!t sandwich. The more bread you have, the less sch!t you eat.

[Superman]

Wow. The difference between Legion's viewpoint and Sniper's is striking. And predictable.

The cell phone owner should have been taken outside and shot. The world would be a better place.

[lukeh]

Phone owner was a jerk for not giving the guy a few bucks.

Phone finder was a jerk for demanding money and not giving him his phone.

Judge was a jerk for such a ridiculous sentence.

Nothing that happens in court surprises me anymore. I had a tenant break their lease and move out 2 months behind in rent. I took him to court and he countered sued me for $1000 because he said he had mice and they ate his 15 year old couch. The reason he had mice was because he broke the basement window so he could smoke inside in the winter. During a pre-trial arbitration the arbitrator laughed at him and told him to give me the 2 months rent. He refused and we went to small claims.

He got up on the stand and changed his story and lied. I lost and not only did he get out of the 2 months rent, I had to give him $1000 so he could replace his 15 year old couch that might have been worth $25. Afterward some guy in the audience told me a just got screwed by the most liberal judge in town. That week I put all 3 properties up for sale and never looked back.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

bingo. He's a lowlife.

The responses of you and a few other douches in this thread has convinced me that if i ever find a phone, i'm keeping it as a paperweight.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by MRM

A couple of thoughts. First, Jim, good luck on getting out of your DWI. I'm sure it is bogus and you'll be fine, but we're pulling for you.

Second, that's an extremely harsh sentence. Up here you might get a 30 suspended sentence with credit for any time served. You'd never serve two weeks for a nonviolent petty theft.

Third, it sounds like this case had to have been prosecuted by complaint. That means the "victim" would have had to make a police report and some proescutor would have had to draft a complaint and send out a summons to black guy. I suppose the cops could have taken the information and mailed black guy a tab charge citation. Either way, up here that particular case would have been declined for prosecution. Given that the phone was lost, found, and almost but not quite returned, we would have probably considered it a civil issue and told the complaining "victim" to sue black guy. If I had taken a case like this the judges up here would have taken me aside and explained the ways of the world to me and told me never to waste their time with pieces of crap cases like that again.

And finally, this is a tough case to appeal. Finding the phone and returning it only if he got paid is probably going to cover the technical definition of theft. Since black guy has a duty to return the lost property, the issue of whether he committed a crime turns on the question of whether he discharged his duty by offering the phone delivered for $20 or to return it to the location of the loss for no money. Unless the court finds that he discharged his duty by bringing the phone back to where he found it and telling the owner where it was, the state probably has proved up each element of the offense. As I think about it though, it does sound like a decent argument that he did discharge his duty, as a matter of law, by returning the lost property to the loss location and advising the owner of where it is. That question turns on whether he has a duty to protect the property upon finding and taking possession of it. Either way, ties in appeals always go to the state, so it's a tough appeal to win.

Was the prosecutor young? Lots of young prosecutors handle every case that's technicaly a crime as aggressively as possible and do things like this until they get enough perspective to realize that isn't what prosecuting is about. If he is older and more experienced, he's just one of that kind of person who in a different time would have been all too happy to do his job to certify the death certificates for all the trainloads of irreconcilables traveling east.

In response to the bold: There is a requirement to return lost property that you find?

Since when?

[RPKESQ]

Dueller,
If it is just $364 to see that this poor guy gets treated right, I'll pay it. If it is more than that let me know what it might take or what else needs to be done.

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by Dueller

MRM...as I posted earlier, the DUI was thrown out on insufficiency of evidence/probable cause and the DUI refusal charge under implied consent was thrown out as the offense/arrest occurred on private property (a nuance in that implied consent statute says offense must have occurred on public roads). I made a pre-trial motion, did a brief proffer, the Judge looked at the prosecutor as if "WTF is this Mickey Mouse charge" and prosecutor caved. Took all of 3 minutes in court but I had battled the prosecutor for weeks on exculpatory evidence I had obtained (16 different store security cams that recorded the entire encounter I obtained via subpoena).

Prosecutor is a grizzled old veteran...pushing 70. I recognize the phone perp was technically wrong in not just giving the owner the phone and a piece of his mind. He tried to present his side and the judge (fairly young) helped him along a bit. The phone owner actually admitted that he had reviewed his phone useage online and there was no indication the perp had ever made a single call from the phone, that he had called the number several times and it went straight to VM, etc. Perp's story was "Look..I've never even owned a cell phone...can't afford one...had no use for one...I'm poor and a little gas money would help me out...that's all I wanted and when I asked him if he could help me out phone owner went nuts calling me a worthless N****r."

Had he had a lawyer I'm sure it never would have come to trial...a deal would have been struck to remand the charges and everybody just go home.

You're correct on the appeal problems...although it would be a trial de novo and I would think I could get it nol pross'd and get the guy outta jail.

Dueller,

What I see is that when the black guy asked for money for gas and got none, he then took the phone and returned it to where he found it. Not knowing all the particulars, that could be construed as theft. Since the offender had no right to the property and he MUST surrender it whether he got paid or not, it would appear at that instant, the black guy committed theft. What do you think? Bad deal anyway you look at it. I am sure the guy was not the brightest light in the string, judging by the fact that he asked for money? He could have told the owner to meet him somewhere to save the gas money???

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by lukeh

Phone owner was a jerk for not giving the guy a few bucks.
I disagree, but understand your point
Phone finder was a jerk for demanding money and not giving him his phone.
Maybe not such a jerk but low on common sense?
Judge was a jerk for such a ridiculous sentence.
Judge was a big jerk. (with big ego)

***

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by Dueller

If you aren't represented by competent counsel, you're screwed.

Problem with taking on the case is by the time I file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis for the guy and get it front of a judge it will be over a week or 10 days.

By contrast my client's DUI was dismissed for insufficient evidence and the second charge of DUI refusal was thrown out because he was stopped on a commercial parking lot (where implied consent laws don't apply). Oh yeah...he was in his red Viper. Had the poor guy been charged he would be facing $1500-2K in fines, loss of license for 6 mos-1 year, jail, Alcohol assessment/treatment program, yadadadadada. Tell ya anything?

Tells me I'd better have a lawyer's number handy...at all times.