DOJ-OGR-00004882.jpg
818 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
818 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal filing, dated July 2, 2021, arguing that it is reasonable for a defendant, Cosby, to rely on the advice of his attorneys. The text cites the 1938 Supreme Court case Johnson v. Zerbst, quoting Justice Black's opinion on the constitutional necessity of counsel for defendants who lack the legal expertise to navigate the complexities of the criminal justice system. The argument centers on the idea that without professional legal guidance, a defendant cannot adequately defend themselves.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| D.A. Castor | District Attorney |
Mentioned as having made a charging decision that Cosby was expected to rely upon.
|
| Cosby | Defendant |
Mentioned as a defendant who acted in reliance upon his attorneys' advice and a charging decision by D.A. Castor.
|
| Justice Black | Justice |
Cited as the author of an explanation in the case Johnson v. Zerbst regarding the right to counsel.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | government agency |
Mentioned in a quote from Johnson v. Zerbst: 'this Court has pointed to the humane policy of modern criminal law...'
|
Timeline (1 events)
1938
Relationships (2)
The document states that D.A. Castor, a prosecutor, made a charging decision and reasonably expected Cosby, the defendant, to act in reliance upon it.
The document discusses Cosby's reliance on the advice of his attorneys, framing it as a reasonable action.
Key Quotes (2)
"[The right to counsel] embodies a realistic recognition of the obvious truth that the average defendant does not have the professional legal skill to protect himself when brought before a tribunal with power to take his life or liberty, wherein the prosecution is presented by experienced and learned counsel. That which is simple, orderly, and necessary to the lawyer, to the untrained layman may appear intricate, complex, and mysterious. Consistently with the wise policy of the Sixth Amendment and other parts of our fundamental charter, this Court has pointed to the humane policy of modern criminal law, which now provides that a defendant, if he be poor, may have counsel furnished [to] him by the state, not infrequently more able than the attorney for the state.’"Source
— Justice Black
(Quoted from the legal case Johnson v. Zerbst (1938) to explain the rationale behind the constitutional right to counsel.)
DOJ-OGR-00004882.jpg
Quote #1
"The right to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel. Even the intelligent and educated layman has small and sometimes no skill in the science of law. If charged with crime, he is incapable, generally, of determining for himself whether the indictment is good or bad. He is unfamiliar with the rules of evidence. Left without the aid of counsel he may be put on trial without a proper charge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, or evidence irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible. He lacks both the skill and knowledge adequately to prepare his defence, even though he [may] have a perfect one. He requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him."Source
— Justice Black
(Quoted from the legal case Johnson v. Zerbst (1938) to further elaborate on the necessity of legal counsel for a defendant.)
DOJ-OGR-00004882.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,481 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 310-1 Filed 07/02/21 Page 70 of 80
announcing it publicly, D.A. Castor reasonably expected Cosby to act in reliance upon his charging decision.
We cannot deem it unreasonable to rely upon the advice of one’s attorneys. The constitutional guarantee of the effective assistance of counsel is premised, in part, upon the complexities that inhere in our criminal justice system. A criminal defendant confronts a number of important decisions that may result in severe consequences to that defendant if, and when, they are made without a full understanding of the intricacies and nuances of the ever-changing criminal law. As Justice Black explained in Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938):
[The right to counsel] embodies a realistic recognition of the obvious truth that the average defendant does not have the professional legal skill to protect himself when brought before a tribunal with power to take his life or liberty, wherein the prosecution is presented by experienced and learned counsel. That which is simple, orderly, and necessary to the lawyer, to the untrained layman may appear intricate, complex, and mysterious. Consistently with the wise policy of the Sixth Amendment and other parts of our fundamental charter, this Court has pointed to the humane policy of modern criminal law, which now provides that a defendant, if he be poor, may have counsel furnished [to] him by the state, not infrequently more able than the attorney for the state.’
The right to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel. Even the intelligent and educated layman has small and sometimes no skill in the science of law. If charged with crime, he is incapable, generally, of determining for himself whether the indictment is good or bad. He is unfamiliar with the rules of evidence. Left without the aid of counsel he may be put on trial without a proper charge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, or evidence irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible. He lacks both the skill and knowledge adequately to prepare his defence, even though he [may] have a perfect one. He requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him.
Id. at 462-63 (cleaned up). Not only was Cosby’s reliance upon the conclusions and advice of his attorneys reasonable, it was consistent with a core purpose of the right to counsel.
[J-100-2020] - 69
DOJ-OGR-00004882
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document