Exiled From Main Street

If you are a regular reader of this blog you already know how I feel about judges interfering with plea bargains. So let me tell you about a recent visit to the St. Charles Municipal Court.

Before I begin I need to tell you that I consider the judge at this court to be a good and honorable lawyer. I have had dealings with him in the past. He has been an opponent in some cases. He is smart, well prepared and courteous. Let me go on.

It was a Thursday night. I was standing in line with three other lawyers waiting to have our cases heard. The judge came in and court was opened by the bailiff. The first lawyer in line approached the bench with his client. I was not paying a great deal of attention. It was the assumption that some plea bargain had been made with the prosecutor and this would be the culmination of the case.

The judge, as judges do, asked the defendant what happened. The defendant went on to explain that he was involved in a fracas on Main Street in St. Charles. At the mention of Main Street the judge sat up straighter in his chair and raised his eyebrows. Without any warning he announced that he had been thinking about imposing a fine of $500 on all of the offenses that took place on Main Street because things were getting out of hand there. He then went on to tell this defendant and his lawyer that he was not going to honor the plea bargain.

Without warning, he instantly imposed the policy he had been thinking about imposing and imposed it, if you will, retroactively. He announced that he was not going to follow the plea offer and that the lawyer should go talk to the prosecutor.

If there are any judges reading this blog let me set this out for you in clear terms so that you understand. That is a slap in the face of a lawyer standing before you representing the defendant. It is an embarrassment. It is humiliating. It puts everybody in a difficult circumstance. I guess it doesn't put the judge in a difficult circumstance. But it puts everybody else in a difficult circumstance.

I know my reaction must have been evident. When it became my turn to stand in front of the judge he noted my reaction. He asked me, sincerely I believe, if I had something to say about it. He was not being confrontational. I don't believe that to be the case. However, I did not say anything at the time because I did not want to adversely influence the outcome of my client's case.

The next day I called the judge. Although it did not talk to him personally I left a voicemail message telling him what I thought. I also told him it would not be necessary to return the call. I just wanted to share my thoughts with him.

Once again, I have never seen a judge refuse to go along with the plea bargain because the judge thought it was too hard on the defendant. They always seem to object to the plea bargain because they think the defendant is not being punished enough. Of course, it is their courtroom and they can believe what they want.

For the lawyers reading this blog, and also for those who visit Main Street in St. Charles, be warned! The judge in St. Charles Municipal Court has announced that there will be a $500 fine for incidents on Main Street.

I don't want to get into the issue as to whether or not that means every case on Main Street is going to end up with a fine of $500. Does that mean that there will be no individual consideration of each individual case? The city Council has set a range of punishment on these infractions. One would think that the court would approach these with an open mind and punish the egregious cases more severely than the minor cases.

I don't know what will come of this for most lawyers who appear in front of this judge with clients who have engaged in illegal conduct on Main Street in St. Charles. I do know how I will deal with it.