@@tcaprecap1448 around the time good old fashioned cocaine got displaced by cheaper, nastier, much more powerful stimulants. I say make cocaine great again! (kidding)
The lawyer isn't looking for creative solutions with the judge, though. He's looking for a way to trick the court into letting the defendant out. 1)If a person is in custody, has a bond that's been set and paid and they get an ICE hold, the sheriff can only hold him 48 hours. After that, they must release him. 2)This man has a paid bond, but is in ICE custody. 3) The lawyer wants him returned to the sheriff for court. 4)once the man comes back, the lawyer is going to wait 2 days and insist the sheriff let him out of jail because the 48 hour time frame has elapsed. This is why he keeps insisting the bond not be revoked. He's trying to help this guy escape ICE..
@Mewse1203 Nah. The lawyer is doing his job while trying to not leave him in a worse position than he found him. He REPEATEDLY says ICE would have custody and could recall him at any time.
I can't fault this lawyer at all. He works on a salary basis, yet goes above and beyond for his clients. This judge is very honorable and is a great person to boot. I can see by the judge's demeanor that the respect between both is mutual. When the judge told him he doesn't want him to get in trouble, that's not a threat or raised ire, that's genuine compassion for another person who is doing a great job and what they believe is right. I hope this lawyer doesn't fly to the sun, because we need more people like him. I love this judge also.
Daedelus an inventor from Greek mythology was a prisoner of a king. Guy was like your pretty smart so im gonna keep ya around here bud. Daedulus then crafted wings using bees wax as the solvent so he and his son icarus could escape. Icarus got to big for his feathers and disobeyed daddy Daedelus flying to close to the ☀ kids those days am I right
I partially disagree. It's good to see a lawyer work hard for his client but this lawyer wants something specific and is not asking for it because he knows it can't happen. He knows that if the judge issues a bench warrant and his client is brought back, he is still in federal custody and he's hoping to cause a miscommunication by the judge releasing his client in error So his client can disappear and avoid the immigration process.
@@paulf3 100 %, man. He's trying to play everyone. I'm not the kind of person who rails against lawyers "using loopholes" or "getting off on a technicality" because those loopholes and technicalities are the law, but this guy is playing a very fine game of hide the ball in order to subvert justice.
Holy fuck that was amazing! Ya'll can shit on Noah all you want but the boy is smart as a whip and is pushing the loophole as he 100% should. That's the kinda guy we need more of in this country.
Feldman is one hell of an attorney. I’ve never seen anyone back the judge in a corner like that. He knows his stuff for sure. As usual, Judge Fleisher is proving how awesome he is. Both men seem to be going into uncharted territory and the prosecution is just trying to tread water. Can’t wait to see how this plays out. Definitely one of the most interesting cases I’ve seen in his courtroom.
When judge made his hypothetical about being unfair to Texas if defendant is in Abu Dabi and not following the bond - can't the attorney respond once he is deported out of US and not residing in Texas, he is out of all their jurisdictions. Judge used a false premise hypothetical. His jurisdiction is limited, he is not a world-wide judge.
I'm no lawyer, but a quick search finds that People v. Suazo establishes that deportation is recognized as a severe penalty and therefore even non-citizen defendants are entitled to 6th ammendment protections and ; People v. Ventura, where the Court of Appeals held that it was an abuse of discretion to dismiss appeals of involuntarily deported noncitizen defendants due to the significant impact of deportation on their lives. Deportation trumps the judge and he can't abuse discretion, he should grant dismissal if ICE deports.
@@devonull8784 People v Suazo sort of establishes that, sort of. It established that it is a harsher punishment to send someone home, it MIGHT justify a jury trial, but does not necessarily override deportation, if the person is found not guilty of whatever crime put the bond / warrant out for them. People v. Ventura... did not go that way once it got to SCOTUS. It went the opposite way you say here. Yes, the initial appeal went that way, but INS pushed it to SCOTUS and won - SCOTUS ordered it back to BIA. Your point, in the end, is only correct on days that constitutional law scholars agree with you - not everyone agrees that the document was intended to protect non-citizens as well. I do believe non-citizens should be afforded the protections, but I'm not a judge / lawyer either.
@@charlesthomas135exactly, he meant “worth my time” in the literal sense. He could not bill a client x number of hours to do the same work due to affordability.
He's saying "If I was paid hourly, I wouldn't be able to justify charging $300 to figure this out. However, I'm paid salary, so I have that liberty." That's exactly what I'd want to hear from my lawyer.
@@aaronarellano7395Atleast this attorney is obviously doing the best job he knows and can do for his Client he does seem to be doing a gr8 job also especially for a Free Court Appointed Attorney, who 90% of Free Court Appointed Lawers do the very minimum and just suck... My Son's Public Defender basically let the D.A. railroad my autistic son into taking a plea deal with maximum punishment on his first offense even with no law enforcement contact before this as a Kid or Adult...
This defense lawyer is one of the most articulate individuals I’ve ever seen in my life. I have never witnessed a more complex situation explained in such a simple fashion. This dude knows his stuff. I know a lot of comments think he is shady but this is a man putting 200% into his job and what he believes in.
He believes in enabling criminals who are assaulting people to continue to assault people because they posted a bond with money our own country gave them in the first place. they arent out any money they earned. They were given free money for breaking the law.
people that think he is shady i guarantee you are of the "deport them all" ilk. if the situation was reversed and it was a person going above and beyond to get someone deported do you really think a single one would be calling them shady for it? not a chance.
Mr. Feldman is not being unethical. He's hard-working and resourceful- a zealous advocate for his client. And Judge Fleischer clearly appreciates that, having defended people himself. And he knows that "this is the way we've always done it here" is not the same as law. I respect all of those practitioners of law.
The title isn’t worded very well. I came here expecting the judge to be telling him off but found him arguing the situation is unethical and the judge praising him for raising it.
The amazingly great care these attorneys and the judge took in this case is astounding and admirable. I am continually impressed with this judge and how much he truly cares about the people in his court, legal or illegal. The young hotshot is destined to be a great lawyer as well. As a Jewish kid, he understands very well his responsibility to fight for the underdog, and he did it in good form. This was fascinating to watch and learn from. Thank you guys, for this.
@@trekgirl65 will be a while, ice gotta receive and evaluate the bench warrant and as said in video they don't have to comply with the warrant and deport him anyway
He found a fake loophole because the system doesn’t work like that and even if it did ICE would subsequently never comply with another bench warrant again.
He’s willfully misinterpreting the law and applying it through his misinterpretation . Not only that, he gives the impression he is negotiating with the court in bad faith. Very unethical.
I know right? Why is this one dudes DUI so important? heck of a fight he’s putting up and I give him his kudos but I don’t understand why that client is so important other than the reasons you stated
No, Feldman wants his client brought back from ICE and then released, which this judge understands is the goal but he’s having none of it. Feldman needs to take the win, get the guy brought back, and then argue to get him released. He’s pushing his luck.
I don't see anything about what Defense doing here as being unethical. He doesn't want his client to lose his $1,000 for not adhering to the terms of his bond, because he didn't have any choice in the matter. He was picked up by ICE, and ICE wouldn't release him to attend his hearing. And the State of Texas has no recourse to force his release, so there is no legal means for his client to comply. It would be equally wrong to issue a bench warrant and then hold him indefinitely in County jail if his bond hasn't been revoked. At that point, Harris County would be unlawfully detaining him (as he is supposedly out on bond). The unethical thing here is that the State of Texas is trying to have it both ways. They are trying not to take away his money (and create a precedent setting case saying they can't do that in the future) *and* they want to hold him indefinitely, so he doesn't get away from ICE (which states have no authority to enforce, so they cannot make it a consideration when determining whether to revoke bail that has already been set). The judge wants him held accountable for the DWI *and* deported. But the only thing the judge may legally care about is the DWI and whether he violated the conditions of his release.
Normally, Judge Fleischer tells them that ICE does "sweeps" of the jail and he may come to their notice. This isn't the case here. Thanks for explaining.
The judge has every right to also deport him. The case is about the DWI, he is guilty and being held with bond. He bonded out, (of the DUI case) hence the county courts jurisdiction ends. However, ICE has a seperate case regarding his deportation for illegal alien status. Hence ICE now has custody and the right to seize the body (capius) a warrant for the arrest is issued by ICE or by a federal immigration judge. This county judge is expediting the process by issuing the ICE warrant for the federal immigration judge, since he is aware of the case and of the violation of the law hence he is bound by his oath of office to issue the capius (warrant) or to revoke the bond. Bear in mind, this revocation/ capius is for the seperate case of illegal status / deportation. The defense attorney is trying to make his case conflict with the constitutional rights not afforded in the Federal case. Hence he would win his case on the grounds of constitutional violations and have grounds for an appeal. The judge can see through this charade. And inst playing that game. Instead he is issuing the capius and making it clear the outcomes of both cases and their respective sentences are seperate issues.
@@timothystone3360 "The judge has every right to also report him." No he doesn't. Immigration judges do. But this is not an immigration court and he is not an immigration judge. The US Constitution makes immigration the sole domain of the federal government. States have no authority to enforce federal law. "The case is about the DWI, he is guilty and being held without bond." This is a pre-trial hearing. And since he hasn't had a trial, he hasn't been convicted. Which means in the eyes of the government, he isn't guilty of anything. The Constitution provides you with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Which is why pre-trial release is a thing. The government releases you after a short period of time, because you are presumed innocent. That said, the government can put conditions in that release in order to make in more likely you will return for the trial, such as requiring a bond. In this case, the defendant was released on a $1,000 bond and was out in the community when he was arrested by federal law enforcement (ICE) on suspicion of having violated federal immigration law. And because there is a high degree of probability that he will not return for an immigration hearing (having been deported once before and being out on bond for a DWI charge), a federal judge refused to give him bond prior to his immigration hearing. And due to that, ICE refused to hand him over to Harris County for trial on the DWI. This attorney is then arguing that it wasn't his client's fault for failing to appear for trial and he shouldn't have his bond revoked for failing to appear (and lose his $1,000). "This county judge is expediting the process by issuing the ICE warrant for the federal immigration judge..." Two things: a) No warrant is necessary as the defendant is already in ICE custody. b) State judges cannot issue warrants on the suspicion that someone may have violated federal law (as they have no authority to enforce that law). Which is also why Harris County will only hold them for ICE for up to 48 hours (the longest they can hold someone without seeing a judge for arraignment). The rest doesn't follow, and what you've said thus far doesn't give me much reason to have confidence in anything you say.
If you get picked up by the next state and can’t attend court your bond would be revoked! So the defense is trying to steal the money from the state. Which I’m no fan of the state, take what you can from them. But, in fairness the bond should be revoked
Bond releases you from state/county custody...they can hold for Ice for 48 hours even with the bond...but once he is 'released' from state/county custody into the Federal ICE custody it is a different jurisdiction. He is Free from the custody of the state/county based upon his bond. But he broke Federal law and is now in their custody. Basically the lawyer is suggesting that they should be releasing his client because it has been more than 48 hours in custody but that 48 hour window only applies to the state/county detainment. He was given to Ice so that clock is reset. When he appears in court he does not return to state/county custody since he will still be under the custody of the federal government. Other than actually charging and sentencing him here( and him being deported after he serves his sentence) not sure what this achieves. Unless the lawyer is suggesting giving his client an opportunity for freedom to run away. However, if his client is still in the sherriffs custody after 48 hours with a bond posted then he has a point if he argued directly for his release. Of course, the judge would probably revoke his bond in lieu of his having been deported before his illegal status, a previous assault charge, and drunk driving. If he was a squeeky clean person who just committed the misdemeanor of illigally entering, that might be another situation entirely.
A thorough explanation indeed! I was hoping you weren't stating that illegal entry into the United States was a misdemeanor 😂 Because it is a felony to enter the U.S.A illegally. And any crime that is committed by an illegal alien can get them deported. 8 U.S.Code 101-649 S 543 to 550 should explain a lot for some who are unsure of the laws of illegal entry into the United States. Also, even in municipal court,(city) as well as State/County, Federal courts, anyone who is in the U.S. on less than full citizenship can be deported for any crime that they've committed in the U.S. I've seen a man from Honduras get deported for 2 seatbelt tickets and no turn signal ticket. It can be for anything.
@WiseChild1987 My mother and father both worked for the Dept of immigration and have for more than 30 years. I highly doubt that what I've said is wrong. I'm nearly 50 years old myself and also work in the government sector. I'd be obliged for you to tell me where I'm wrong? Please,
I'm not convinced. I think he was hoping very much that he wouldn't have to explain the likely outcome of a course that he may have an obligation to pursue. I like the judge, but I'm not clear that he is fully grasping the situation. Then again, maybe he does and Feldman is just inexperienced or a weasel
@@kcgunesqI've watched a fair few videos and Feldman mentions he has no past experience in criminal law and specialises in immigration law, from my perspective his a weasel, state is agreeing to a bench warrant without bond revocation out of good faith and he aim well at least openly thinks to do screw the state over, and mentioning it. client been deported once before
They (not this court) are trying to steal the $1,000 bond from his client and my guess is this lawyer has seen them do it many times so he's fighting for his client.
@@somenygaard "common sense" now is knowing the ins and outs of ICE operating procedure? literally not "common sense" by any stretch of the imagination yet you wanna talk ideology? please 🙄🙄
Ice Detainers are not just for 48 hours. Harris County can hold for ICE in their jail as a courtesy hold. It is essentially the same as holding him in ICE custody. This happens everyday across the country.
An ice detainer is for 48 hours. That is local law enforcement can hold even after they have bonded out for up to 48 hours to allow ice time to get him in their custody. Their custody does not necessarily mean they have him physically, just that they have files the paperwork for legal custody to transfer. Some jurisdictions that politically do not like enforcement of immigration policy will not cooperate and demand ice take them in physical custody. This jurisdiction is one of those.
@@jasoncurrie5775Yeah those jurisdictions are disgusting because they care more about a political argument than they do of their own civilians. This case proves why it should never be allowed.
@@jasoncurrie5775 Holding longer than 48 hours after bonding out gets into habeus corpus type issues, which is what this defense attorney was totally trying to have. I guarantee that is what he was going to argue if his client was held for more than 48 hours.
Ice detainers are ridiculous in the first place. You broke the law, got caught, you stay in jail until you are tried and convicted or deported. No one should be roaming around our country if they have broken the law by entering illegally and then committing another crime.
Neither DHS nor local law enforcement has unlimited resources at its disposal. It is therefore necessary for every agency---at the federal, state, and local levels of law enforcement---to assess which conceivable allocation of available resources best supports its most urgent law enforcement priorities. This sort of legal triage happens every day in every agency within every jurisdiction throughout the country. Police, for instance, do not deploy all available officers to patrol the streets in a search for jaywalkers or perpetrators of minor traffic infractions, to the point of neglecting investigations of robberies, assaults, sex crimes, and murders. Similarly, prosecutors don't put equal effort into every prosecution. Instead, they evaluate 1) the strength of available witness testimony and forensic evidence, 2) the severity of the crimes that are alleged, 3) their likelihood of prevailing in court, 4) the level of expenditure that successful prosecution will likely require, 5) the likely sentencing outcomes, and 6) the likely political and public safety consequences of either bringing the case or opting for nolle prosequi instead. On the basis of such evaluations of these and other salient factors, leadership determines the optimal allocation of staff hours, talent, and funding. Implicit in all of this is the inherent discretion of prosecutors to prioritize some prosecutions over others. Accordingly, they may agree to lesser charges, resulting in the imposition of lighter sentences and less severe adverse collateral consequences, in exchange for a swift and definite disposition or defendants' cooperation in future prosecutions of others. As justice dictates, they may even decline to prosecute altogether. Without such discretion, they would be required to prosecute every alleged instance of criminal conduct, to charge the highest conceivable offense, and to seek the maximum possible penalty in every prosecution until all available resources be exhausted. Inevitably, this would result in an increase in failed prosecutions based on trumped up charges arising from conduct that gives even slightest offense and a decrease in successful prosecutions of the worst and rarest crimes. It works much the same for DHS. Immigration authorities do not have the resources necessary to facilitate the removal of every undocumented immigrant within the country. ICE detention and removal officers must therefore prioritize certain cases over others, focusing on the removal of those who represent a threat to public health, safety, and security first before turning their attention to those among the undocumented who have committed no crimes and whose removal doesn't advance public interests at the same level of importance as health, safety, and security. The Constitution, which encapsulates the most supreme, most foundational laws of our society, does not permit indefinite detention of persons on the basis of mere accusations of criminal behavior---absent some judicial finding of being a flight risk or a threat to public health, safety, or security. Nevertheless, the judge here is claiming authority, despite such constitutional potections, to subject this defendant to indefinite detention even after his payment of the appearance bond set by the court as a condition of his release from custody, pending adjudication of the charges against him. The attorney's argument exposes an impermissible violation of the Constitution baked into structure of the system.
He’s been deported once. These cases just frustrate me. He commits another crime while here! The path is clear. No permission to be here? Go back. Period.
ICE wants to deport him. But if they deport him, they can't try him for the DWI. The judge wants to make sure he gets tried for the DWI *and then* deported.
This defense attorney is his own enemy. The judge agreed to not revoke his bond and then he tells the judge he was going to the sheriff in opposition to the court?
I'd say it's a good thing he did because if he hadn't mentioned it and went ahead and managed to get his client released - going behind the court's back - he'd be in a world of hurt. His slip let the Judge, a really stand-up guy, have the opportunity to give him some counsel on the ethical and legal ramifications if the attorney tried creating and exploiting a loophole - one only created by the Judge and District Attorney's office willing to give assistance through potentially deceptive reasoning. The attorney didn't get bench-slapped, but now he knows that's a damn good possibility if he tries to pull off this stunt. Hopefully he thinks better about it, or consults another neutral attorney.
I think you misunderstood the problem. The attorney was absolutely right in that 1. It’s not his client’s fault he missed court thus forfeiting the bond, 2. Once the judge reinstated the bond and issued the bench warrant to bring the detainee back to the municipal court, he can only be held for 48 hrs. The attorney was trying to save his client $1,000, save his client from unnecessary hassle when ICE eventually comes back for him and he’s not in a municipal jail cell, and save the judge’s skin by accidentally releasing a detainee who (if he didn’t have the ICE retainer) would be released with bond conditions. The bond conditions would have probably been alcohol testing, an interlock device, etc.
As a civil engineering student, I was told by professors, “if you have the slightest doubt of whether something is unethical, it’s unethical.” It’s absolutely wild that what he was planning to do didn’t trigger any internal red flags… it makes me wonder what other wild, probably legal but completely unethical things he’s done or will do in the future.
Your last bit there. In Accounting we're taught "Not Everything Legal is Ethical", I like to add "and everything Illegal is Unethical". It's only wild it went under the radar till he specifically said it because most people don't think people are so wildly unethical.
I know a little bit about law, learned it the hard way but learned it good, and you do NOT play these kinds of games in a court of law. I am not an attorney, so if I represent myself I can pull some dirty tricks and get away with them, because I don't have a law license to lose, mostly just to annoy my opponents or in some cases to lawfully challenge their ethics, such as filing a grievance against my opponent's attorney so that she could no longer represent my opponent against me due to conflict of interest (the ploy worked). Yeah, you're right about this guy. He'll do whatever it takes, whatever he can get away with. He's young, he may sacrifice his own future if he doesn't reel it in.
It’s a good rule to live by. Because it’s usually not one great big step into unethical territory. At least with accounting scandals like Enron/Arthur Anderson, it was a whole collection of tiny little steps (each justifiable on their own) that led to a place that was incredibly unethical when reviewed in hindsight.
There’s no advocacy in engineering. You could get disciplined for something ethical related to failing to advocate appropriately just as easily. It’s not as easy as you make it out to be.
What if this judge used social media to help maintain justice. Why is fairness in the court system blowing our minds with this judge? We are not use to this as citizens.
Because judges like him are rare most of them are employees of the state and thats all they care about is making as much money as possible no matter if they are screwing people over and they have no interest in helping people ive been infront of a few judges over the years i have two felony convictions that should have been thrown out but i was told I would go to prison unless i took plea deals years later once i grew up and got smarter i went through my motion of discovery and found out that they had zero evidence i had an attorney look it over and he said wow the state had zero evidence it never should have made it past the probable cause hearing the DA didn't care the judge didn't care my public defender didn't care they are all employees of the state this judge has no problem calling out the police or the DA when they falsely charge people
I think that the lawyer is struggling to get his point across. Best bet is to go off the record and have a 1 on 1 chat with him to work out exactly what he is trying to explain. Because there is some huge disconnect in communication here.
That's literally his job as an attorney, you donut. I've yet to meet an attorney whose personal mantra was: "Oh well, freedom would've been nice, but at least 10 years are not the death penalty. 🤷🏼♂️". 🤣 What about you? 🤗
@soxpeewee You must have been sleeping at the first or you would know his initial goal was to get his client back to his home Country before the holidays. But the Judge will not go for this. The lawyer did not ask or want to be placed in the position the Court placed him in. This lawyer deserves more praise than what most comments here give him.
This lawyer is lying through his teeth. He is going to demand they release this man after 48 hours. The man will flee, and this whole game starts all over again.
@laurelwoodward2700 Just because you do not understand what you watched does not mean Mr Feldman is not being truthful with the Court. He has gone above and beyond to help the Court understand what could happen if they continue as planned.
Yes, but he's in ICE custody now. The lawyer is going to try and get him back, wait 2 days and say ICE never picked him up and they must release him. That's not going to go well for him.
Excellent case here, I love what the defense attorney is doing, brilliant. And I appreciate the honest and thoughtful responses from the judge. Is there a later hearing that we could see to know what happened?
How is nobody seeing what the defense is saying. They're trying to hold on an ICE detainer that says hold 48 hours, and that's it. A bench warrant was issued without a bond revocation... so the bench warrant gives permission to obtain the body, then ICE says the body can be held for 48 hours.. after 48 hours and no bond revocation he's being held for what?
In video it said dwi but the ice custody for illegally entering country for the second time took the federal charges above the state charges. This is state court while attorney is playing both sides trying to make anything happen.
@ it’s kinda not. It just means the bond goes to state fines. A dwi after court costs and fines will actually be over a grand really so if anything he owes more but the feds supersede the state. Also they are going to take him before he’s right with them. It’s weird. So really everyone is screwed. Comes down to ice not doing their job in timely manner while having the final say.
@@justanotheroglesby2847 So you are presuming that he is found guilty in the state court. Otherwise what state fines? Imagine it is you. They arrest you and set a bond. You post the bond, but do not let you out saying "Do not worry, that money will go toward your fines at sentencing". Don't you see it is backwards to talk about counting something towards the sentence before being found guilty?
Ahhh i just watched the whole video but now i want to know what happens next..."will the attorney SAM request that he be released, will the judge issue a no bond, will Sarah come back from the dead and marry Edward, find out next week on Days of our Lives
Most people commenting on all court videos on YT have no understanding of how the law and courts truly operate. They base their opinions on the fictitious view they’ve gained from television shows.
Yes he did at every single possible solution. He spent hours on this case. He sounds like he gives his clients their money's worth and not just take money and not fight.
@@poultryhousefarmer well, it does sound like he's a public defender since he's on a salary. But good to know we the taxpayers are getting our monies worth😂
As an attorney, I would have requested a modification to bond under which the court would change it to a PR bond with terms. After the bond modification, the $1,000 can be returned because it exceeds the amount necessary to secure his release. After the return, revoke him, and if ICE transports him you continue while he remains in ICE or Harris County custody. If he isn't turned over, when he is deported, continue to try the case in absentia, order a capias so if he returns and is picked up, he is to be brought before the court. The defendant could sign paperwork to be voluntarily absent, but that really shouldn't be necessary as a DUI is probably a misdemeanor charge.
I'm certain you have to think about it in reverse: if a man is arrested on a warrant & posts bond, the county has to hold him for 48 hours in total to give ICE a chance to pick him up. In this case, ICE already 'picked him up', so the detention will stay until he is deported. There is no way for the Defendant to leave ICE custody once he was already in it and they have a deportation planned.
@hughjarse4205 Your close, at least you have given it more thought than most. If he is brought back for this Court hearing. He would no longer in in ICE custody. He has made bond on these charges, so he could only be held legally for 48 hours.
@@timothyboone5003 Are you sure that ICE would relinquish custody? I thought they could simply transport him to the hearing, keeping him in custody, then take him back to the detention center. His jail time is effectively over, but not his detention time. Does that make sense?
The lawyer really messed up in saying what his true intentions were. He knew it, the judge knew it, prosecution knew it, we all knew it because it was written all over his face and body language. Really trying too hard to play the system, which will cost him. It seems ICE can snatch you off the street or from jail if you're in the country illegally and have you sit in detention until you're deported. It's totally irrelevant if you posted bond or not because of being an illegal and not a citizen.
@jeffreyhendricks3932 Why do you believe the lawyer messed up? He has been placed in a conundrum and has brought it to the Courts attention. Considering the situation he has been placed in, I believe he’s doing one hell of a job.
@MikeydeLaraCovers The amount of 0 you place on an already fictitious statement will not make it more true. Without being able to identify one single perceived ethics violation, your comment is meritless.
@@timothyboone5003Your honor, id like to cite TH-cam Comment section law 1.1.34 which states that 98% of all comments are totally baseless and should be received as such. And also in Nevada v. Fegerson, where smarty pants who come off the top rope to shut down the lesser educated in said section should feel good for no more than 5 minutes after posting, or risk the chance of revealing how much of their lives are based in this digital universe.
Mr. Feldman is horrified that his client is being subjected to indefinite detention even after paying the appearance bond set by the court as a condition of his client's release from pre-trial detention.
The government has no qualms about screwing over the average guy, over any whim. If a guy finds a legal loophole, let him use it. The judge can then go revoke his bond, after he's released and doesn't show up for court.
This isn’t a loophole though. The defendant wanted to plead guilty and get deported but the judge wanted him to come in person which started the whole argument. The guy is out on bond and hasn’t violated his bond so the judge can’t legally revoke it, and ICE can’t hold him in civil custody forever so the right thing to do is release him.
This lawyer is trying to represent his client using methods he thinks are loopholes. But what’s gonna happen is, they’re gonna sanction him and test his ability as a lawyer. And in the process he may get disbarred. He needs to go back to the books and make sure his moves are ordered in the steps of the law.
At the very least before going forward with ANY risky tactics he should have had lengthy discussions about it with other People who could have fixed any understanding confusions he might be having...but then again maybe ALL the other People he discussed it with also couldn't see any faults...
@AuntieKim There’s no “loopholes” being played here. The lawyer is making the Court aware of the fact that the County can not legally keep the defendant in custody if the defendant has made a bond set by the Court itself. And that the hold ICE has placed upon the defendant is only good for 48 hours. At that point he would have to be released. The lawyer would not be representing his client to the best of his abilities if he did not demand his client’s release after that 48 hours. The lawyer deserves recognition for his zealous representation, while at the same time threading a fine line of the catch 22 situation the Court has placed him in. He’s doing an amazing job considering his situation and the fact he is an appointed lawyer.
@@timothyboone5003 It's great to point out inconsistencies and errors of course...but when the judge starts warning...it's time to concede defeat and count it as a learning experience for next time. Reflect and ask yourself if your ego is getting in your own way or if you missed something
Mann! Judge is amazing. To hold court like that with no anger or able to hide it well. His first sentence on zoom i knew what he was trying to do. He's in too deep.
The state has all the money power and influence and for a lawyer to take it to the line is admirable. Mr Feldman is an awesome attorney and I would want him to represent me.
Yes if he said nothing then if ICE did not pick him up then the jailer would contact the court, then they'd either have to A. Release him, B. Get him to court right away (which is still iffy with no bond revocation) or C. Revoke the bond.
@ShawnChristopher10101 You seem to magically forget that all Mr Feldman and his client wanted was to plead guilty to all charges. Doing this would help expedite his deportation. They didn’t want or ask for all these other shenanigans the Court has caused.
The lawyer seems to have his heart in the right place and is working hard for his client and the judge of course is his usual fair and unbiased self. But here I think it's a case of the lawyer trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Yea he's trying to loop hole his client out of jail. He's trying to get him out of federal custody into state custody. Then once in state custody he knows it'll take time to get him into court, so he's going to go in and say to release him from state custody since he's paid his state bonds.
@cyclonicblade he should have kept his mouth shut though cause he told the judge his plan. He could have just got him out after 48 hours if he didn't keep speaking. Sometimes less is more. Even lawyers talk to much.
I think the confusion is the warrant for the body is separate from the bond. If the judge can bench warrant ordinarily without a bond yet in place, and have jurisdiction over the body until the court decides its business is done, then there is no issue with it. In other words A) is bench warrant and B) is bond. Defense is over thinking unless the rules combine the two. Great example of advocacy. Loved him zooming in his client's appearance.
because his status as an illegal immigrant is a federal matter and has no legal relevance in a state court beyond necessary coordination with federal agencies. State courts deal with state laws, federal court deals with federal laws. The only time that they should intersect is when state law interferes with federal law, which at that point federal courts determine whether it interferes with explicit federal powers. But all other times they don't consider the other's legal process.
If only every lawyer was this zealous when it came to representing their client. I do think he was thinking upon his return he would be released and don't see this was in any way breaking the law. At most it would be taking advantage of the kindness of the judge! Kudos to the attorney for thinking outside the box.
In my country an answer of “I don’t know what to tell you” is never an acceptable answer from a judge. If a lawyer comes with a legal argument then the judge must cone with a legal argument too.
“I’m not afraid judge”- says the immigration attorney as his voice goes up and octave and starts to get less and less sure of his argument. I understand making a zealous argument for your client- and he initially did so. But he constantly over talked the prosecutor and the judge MULTIPLE times And he knew it bc he’d peek up from his papers to see how they reacted. I have a hard time calling his arguments appropriate when he cuts off everyone. Its obvious watching the 2nd part, that he was relying on ‘surprising’ the prosecution but entering 10 exhibits and expecting to jump straight into arguments trying to keep the prosecutors from looking over the case law he was sighting etc. I’ll admit I don’t know all the ins and outs of haw or if our constitution applies to someone who is proven here illegal but I’m curious. Plus he’s ALREADY been deported before- my empathy is running low for him or his attorney
So a person can have their bond revoked for actions they didn't do? Seems weird. I don't think anyone should be released from jail when they do a felony when sneaking into this country. Because when a person sneaks into the country its against the law and a felony charge. They have no rights to be free. Some countries have the death penalty when you sneak into their country. This country goes light on the people.
@esdee878 most countries will charge a person with espionage even if they are not doing that. So china, Saudi arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, and North korea are just a handful of countries that can put you to death for that. We even trade lots with China and lots of people go to travel there. Best know the laws of different countries and not think the rest of the world has the same laws as the west.
@@SqueakyWheelMakesNoise that doesn't happen on a regular basis. Each person entering a country illegally isn't going to be charged with espionage. You watch way too many movies. It does happen, just not as frequently as you describe.
@@esdee878 and even though it's 2024 I bet you don't think people are purchased as slaves in an open market. You live in a small make believe world. Lots of bad countries out there. Property don't have rights.
Millions of "illegal immigrants" in the US committed no crime of "sneaking in". They came in legally on visas and then simply stayed, which is not a crime.
Go behind the courts back... what a joke... the lawyer stated the law it's written.. he's just a badass defense attorney and the judge isn't use to someone actually fighting for their client like that... whoever this guy is just got contacted by the cartels 😅😂
There's no law stating Harris County has to release his client after 48 hours. The guy is *in* ICE custody. There's no issue with Harris keeping him in custody *for* ICE while dealing with his DUI trial.
@@LNR21then he won't be showing integrity whilst dealing and communicating with the court and all parties involved which is breaking the Texas State BAR oath
Why? He has already thought this through. Looked at the law. The law states that a hold can only occur for 48 hours. When a bond has been issued it cannot be revoked except for certain reasons. One of the first things the lawyer said was that he didn't want the bond revoked. The person, presumed innocent, has not willfully broken any bond conditions. He has been forced by ICE (civilly, and legally). I don't see what the issue is to try to get your client out of jail by using the law. It seems to me what they have always done might have broken the law and people have been sitting unlawfully. What is the basis for a grievance on this man? Avoiding telling the court his intentions? The lawyer was very clear that he didn't believe there was a legal basis to hold him more than 48 hours. Now. I really like this judge. He is exceptionally fair. Him being one who actually looks at PC despite what has found afterwards is extremely admirable. But my view is that the lawyer is excellent and doing a thankless job. That might not always sit right with the court. But his client isn't the court. His client is in custody and the job of the lawyer is to get him out (lawfully). The lawyer has an obligation to "candor to the tribunal". Not an obligation to tell the court how he is going to try to maneuver the case to find the best result. Which would include the intricacies and perhaps holes in the law when it comes to two sovereigns. The Federal and the State.
The law is in the defendants favour on this case. Mr Feldman is using the legal process to benefit his client: the prosecution pointing this out as an abuse is irrelevant if he is advocating for his client within the rule of law
No way should someone get released if they are on an ice hold. The guy literally has already been deported and he’s here committing offenses. Guilty, deport, and wait for him to return….
He almost had this case in a misjudgment and got nervous and fumbled the bag. He never would of thought of the loophole before he wanted to "double check"
The defense attorney reviewed his hand! He asked for a favor and was going to use it to get his client out. Why is he so concerned about the bond of an illegal alien? Will it be used to pay him?
@MrSmith0128 Where’s the “loophole”? The lawyer is bound by a code of ethics. He’s being fully forthcoming with the Court. The Court has failed to recognize the catch 22 situation the lawyer is in.
@@timothyboone5003 He has no catch 22. He's going to try to claim that ICE never picked him up on their hold and have him released even though they did. It's not a loophole, it's someone who is gonna get himself in trouble by subverting ju stice. In order to do what he's planning to do, he has essentially lie. ICE has ahold on him, they used that hold within 48 hours. If they release him back into the sheriff's custody, that doesn't negate that. If he tries to claim the 48 hour rule, he's setting himself up for a bad time.
It don’t matter what you’re intentions are if you have a judge telling you on the record that you better be careful of ethics violations I’d sit that one out
This was some fine legal logic. This is what makes court so interesting. Not many judges are as open to creative solutions.
Lack of intellectual creativity is definitely a problem in US lately
@@feraldragon850 Lack of intellectual curiosity has been a problem in this country since the 1970s.
@@tcaprecap1448 around the time good old fashioned cocaine got displaced by cheaper, nastier, much more powerful stimulants. I say make cocaine great again! (kidding)
The lawyer isn't looking for creative solutions with the judge, though. He's looking for a way to trick the court into letting the defendant out.
1)If a person is in custody, has a bond that's been set and paid and they get an ICE hold, the sheriff can only hold him 48 hours. After that, they must release him.
2)This man has a paid bond, but is in ICE custody.
3) The lawyer wants him returned to the sheriff for court.
4)once the man comes back, the lawyer is going to wait 2 days and insist the sheriff let him out of jail because the 48 hour time frame has elapsed.
This is why he keeps insisting the bond not be revoked. He's trying to help this guy escape ICE..
@Mewse1203 Nah. The lawyer is doing his job while trying to not leave him in a worse position than he found him. He REPEATEDLY says ICE would have custody and could recall him at any time.
I can't fault this lawyer at all. He works on a salary basis, yet goes above and beyond for his clients. This judge is very honorable and is a great person to boot. I can see by the judge's demeanor that the respect between both is mutual. When the judge told him he doesn't want him to get in trouble, that's not a threat or raised ire, that's genuine compassion for another person who is doing a great job and what they believe is right. I hope this lawyer doesn't fly to the sun, because we need more people like him. I love this judge also.
Thanks for the reference to the Promethean hero, these kind of literary allusions are rare in youtube comment sections.
Daedelus an inventor from Greek mythology was a prisoner of a king. Guy was like your pretty smart so im gonna keep ya around here bud. Daedulus then crafted wings using bees wax as the solvent so he and his son icarus could escape. Icarus got to big for his feathers and disobeyed daddy Daedelus flying to close to the ☀ kids those days am I right
Lawyer is on someone’s retainer. Recently found out this judge ie woke re illegal aliens 🤬🤯
I partially disagree. It's good to see a lawyer work hard for his client but this lawyer wants something specific and is not asking for it because he knows it can't happen. He knows that if the judge issues a bench warrant and his client is brought back, he is still in federal custody and he's hoping to cause a miscommunication by the judge releasing his client in error So his client can disappear and avoid the immigration process.
@@paulf3 100 %, man. He's trying to play everyone. I'm not the kind of person who rails against lawyers "using loopholes" or "getting off on a technicality" because those loopholes and technicalities are the law, but this guy is playing a very fine game of hide the ball in order to subvert justice.
We need a follow up of this one
Yes we do! That was gripping
Agreed
Agreed!!!! I wonder if ICE will comply with Bench Warrant.
@ and I wonder if his lawyers motive is to get him out?
Holy fuck that was amazing! Ya'll can shit on Noah all you want but the boy is smart as a whip and is pushing the loophole as he 100% should. That's the kinda guy we need more of in this country.
Feldman is one hell of an attorney. I’ve never seen anyone back the judge in a corner like that. He knows his stuff for sure. As usual, Judge Fleisher is proving how awesome he is. Both men seem to be going into uncharted territory and the prosecution is just trying to tread water. Can’t wait to see how this plays out. Definitely one of the most interesting cases I’ve seen in his courtroom.
The correct solution is obvious and simple: ICE tells the county to piss off and deports him. County eventually revokes bail. End of story.
@justinsmith623
You’re one of the few that actually understood what was happening in the video.
When judge made his hypothetical about being unfair to Texas if defendant is in Abu Dabi and not following the bond - can't the attorney respond once he is deported out of US and not residing in Texas, he is out of all their jurisdictions. Judge used a false premise hypothetical. His jurisdiction is limited, he is not a world-wide judge.
I'm no lawyer, but a quick search finds that People v. Suazo establishes that deportation is recognized as a severe penalty and therefore even non-citizen defendants are entitled to 6th ammendment protections and ; People v. Ventura, where the Court of Appeals held that it was an abuse of discretion to dismiss appeals of involuntarily deported noncitizen defendants due to the significant impact of deportation on their lives. Deportation trumps the judge and he can't abuse discretion, he should grant dismissal if ICE deports.
@@devonull8784 People v Suazo sort of establishes that, sort of. It established that it is a harsher punishment to send someone home, it MIGHT justify a jury trial, but does not necessarily override deportation, if the person is found not guilty of whatever crime put the bond / warrant out for them. People v. Ventura... did not go that way once it got to SCOTUS. It went the opposite way you say here. Yes, the initial appeal went that way, but INS pushed it to SCOTUS and won - SCOTUS ordered it back to BIA.
Your point, in the end, is only correct on days that constitutional law scholars agree with you - not everyone agrees that the document was intended to protect non-citizens as well.
I do believe non-citizens should be afforded the protections, but I'm not a judge / lawyer either.
“If I wasn’t a salaried employee, it wouldn’t be worth my time,” is something every client wants to hear their lawyer say. 🤦🏻♀️
Luckily, the client appeared on a laptop screen and understood only Spanish.
He means if he wasn't salaried, he would be charging the client hours for it. Why would being salaried make Lawyer want to do MORE
@@charlesthomas135exactly, he meant “worth my time” in the literal sense. He could not bill a client x number of hours to do the same work due to affordability.
He's saying "If I was paid hourly, I wouldn't be able to justify charging $300 to figure this out. However, I'm paid salary, so I have that liberty." That's exactly what I'd want to hear from my lawyer.
@ it would of been far more than $300. As insane as it is, my billing rate as a sr engineer is $210/hr, most lawyers fall in the $150-$300 range.
You can see the moment where the defense attorney is like oh I took it too far.
that's what i was thinking
@ericarydholm2082
No that’s a look of “how do I get this Judge to understand the position he has placed me in?.
That's what a lot of lawyers do see where the line is then they stop.
I'm coming up on it so I'm looking for it 😂
@@timothyboone5003 That is what good lawyers do. They get to the line, then they stop. (Grammar) lol 😆
This is an interesting game of chess. The judge has decided you're free to do what you want, but not from the potential consequences. Your move.
"I know I'm being annoying." At least he is self aware, lol.
Doing your job isn't annoying, thats why the judge told him he was fine and being annoying.
@@aaronarellano7395 he is definitely doing a gr8 job for his client I think especially for a Free Court Appointed Lawer...
@@aaronarellano7395Atleast this attorney is obviously doing the best job he knows and can do for his Client he does seem to be doing a gr8 job also especially for a Free Court Appointed Attorney, who 90% of Free Court Appointed Lawers do the very minimum and just suck... My Son's Public Defender basically let the D.A. railroad my autistic son into taking a plea deal with maximum punishment on his first offense even with no law enforcement contact before this as a Kid or Adult...
Disagree, the lawyer was just literally saying you can't keep him here its illegal! Which it is.
This man is what a real judge should be. Every judge in this country should spend a day in the Judges courtroom.
@@Look_What_You_Didbecause he allows video in his court room is why
I got dizzy with this circular conversation!!! 😂 I admire this defense attorney. Judge should have private conversation when flexing and barking.
This defense lawyer is one of the most articulate individuals I’ve ever seen in my life. I have never witnessed a more complex situation explained in such a simple fashion. This dude knows his stuff. I know a lot of comments think he is shady but this is a man putting 200% into his job and what he believes in.
He believes in enabling criminals who are assaulting people to continue to assault people because they posted a bond with money our own country gave them in the first place. they arent out any money they earned. They were given free money for breaking the law.
people that think he is shady i guarantee you are of the "deport them all" ilk. if the situation was reversed and it was a person going above and beyond to get someone deported do you really think a single one would be calling them shady for it? not a chance.
You are one of the few that has understood what happened in the video.
Mr. Feldman is not being unethical. He's hard-working and resourceful- a zealous advocate for his client. And Judge Fleischer clearly appreciates that, having defended people himself. And he knows that "this is the way we've always done it here" is not the same as law. I respect all of those practitioners of law.
@skipdalu5805
Very accurate comment, one of the few who understands what they just witnessed.
The title isn’t worded very well. I came here expecting the judge to be telling him off but found him arguing the situation is unethical and the judge praising him for raising it.
That's arm twisting to the T
No one accused him of being unethical. The judge only him about being unethical and doing something illegal.
Mr Feldman is a good man doing a good job. Why does that seem rare these days?
I know it's probably legalese.. but every time they say "recovering the body" I go "oh, geeze murder? 😂
habeas corpus
YES 🤣😭 I thought the same thing 🤣🤣
@@cleementine a whole new meaning 🤣😭
The amazingly great care these attorneys and the judge took in this case is astounding and admirable. I am continually impressed with this judge and how much he truly cares about the people in his court, legal or illegal. The young hotshot is destined to be a great lawyer as well. As a Jewish kid, he understands very well his responsibility to fight for the underdog, and he did it in good form. This was fascinating to watch and learn from. Thank you guys, for this.
Oh we need the biggest of follow ups on this one.
We will get it soon enough.
@@trekgirl65 will be a while, ice gotta receive and evaluate the bench warrant and as said in video they don't have to comply with the warrant and deport him anyway
@@jxswu3224 the judge said generally about 90 days so even if they expedited it by getting it to the right person, I'm thinking 60-75 days atleast.
Seconded.
After the prosecution told ICE what the lawyer said he intended to do, there is zero chance ICE transferred custody.
I love this judge!
He found a loop hole it sounds like. Almost like some Better Call Saul shit.
He's making a loophole. 😳
It is!
He found a fake loophole because the system doesn’t work like that and even if it did ICE would subsequently never comply with another bench warrant again.
He’s willfully misinterpreting the law and applying it through his misinterpretation .
Not only that, he gives the impression he is negotiating with the court in bad faith. Very unethical.
@hustlr23
It’s not a “loophole”. The lawyer is forewarning the Court as to what he would be obligated to do. What more could you ask from him?
I love hearing people recite numbers. It's interesting watching how different people group the same numbers.
This lawyer is fighting for his client like he's in the Mexican 🌯🌮 Mafia
😂😂😂
I know right? Why is this one dudes DUI so important? heck of a fight he’s putting up and I give him his kudos but I don’t understand why that client is so important other than the reasons you stated
I enjoyed the lawyer/judge back and forth arguments. More of these cases would be appreciated. 👍
If there were more, I think he'd post them. But we gt what he has. You know?
Yeah maybe he’ll go down to the courthouse and tell them to do that so you can have more videos like this.
Oooooh. Attorney bout to start a fed case with this one. 😂 Micky Haller never gives up the plan.
i love feldman’s face at 28:36 after the judge says hes going to follow the law.. but feldman’s trying to explain the loophole in the law
The bond being stolen is the issue. They shound just give him his $ back and deport him.
No, Feldman wants his client brought back from ICE and then released, which this judge understands is the goal but he’s having none of it. Feldman needs to take the win, get the guy brought back, and then argue to get him released. He’s pushing his luck.
Screw his bond it can go toward court cost.
Nah fk dat would you let em
Take your bread
No, when you trespass into someone else's home and run up a bill, with a court no less, then you'd better pay the tab before you get to leave.
@@GmodeFr-c9e Well they could try to litigate it but since they aren't a US citizen they'd have a hard time.
The way they’re both clamoring for the judges affection is wild tho lol foreal. I did good judge, no I did good! You guys both did a great job 😂
I don't see anything about what Defense doing here as being unethical. He doesn't want his client to lose his $1,000 for not adhering to the terms of his bond, because he didn't have any choice in the matter. He was picked up by ICE, and ICE wouldn't release him to attend his hearing. And the State of Texas has no recourse to force his release, so there is no legal means for his client to comply. It would be equally wrong to issue a bench warrant and then hold him indefinitely in County jail if his bond hasn't been revoked. At that point, Harris County would be unlawfully detaining him (as he is supposedly out on bond). The unethical thing here is that the State of Texas is trying to have it both ways. They are trying not to take away his money (and create a precedent setting case saying they can't do that in the future) *and* they want to hold him indefinitely, so he doesn't get away from ICE (which states have no authority to enforce, so they cannot make it a consideration when determining whether to revoke bail that has already been set). The judge wants him held accountable for the DWI *and* deported. But the only thing the judge may legally care about is the DWI and whether he violated the conditions of his release.
You explained that so well thank you!
Normally, Judge Fleischer tells them that ICE does "sweeps" of the jail and he may come to their notice. This isn't the case here. Thanks for explaining.
The judge has every right to also deport him.
The case is about the DWI, he is guilty and being held with bond.
He bonded out, (of the DUI case) hence the county courts jurisdiction ends.
However, ICE has a seperate case regarding his deportation for illegal alien status.
Hence ICE now has custody and the right to seize the body (capius) a warrant for the arrest is issued by ICE or by a federal immigration judge.
This county judge is expediting the process by issuing the ICE warrant for the federal immigration judge, since he is aware of the case and of the violation of the law hence he is bound by his oath of office to issue the capius (warrant) or to revoke the bond.
Bear in mind, this revocation/ capius is for the seperate case of illegal status / deportation.
The defense attorney is trying to make his case conflict with the constitutional rights not afforded in the Federal case. Hence he would win his case on the grounds of constitutional violations and have grounds for an appeal.
The judge can see through this charade. And inst playing that game. Instead he is issuing the capius and making it clear the outcomes of both cases and their respective sentences are seperate issues.
@@timothystone3360 "The judge has every right to also report him."
No he doesn't. Immigration judges do. But this is not an immigration court and he is not an immigration judge. The US Constitution makes immigration the sole domain of the federal government. States have no authority to enforce federal law.
"The case is about the DWI, he is guilty and being held without bond."
This is a pre-trial hearing. And since he hasn't had a trial, he hasn't been convicted. Which means in the eyes of the government, he isn't guilty of anything. The Constitution provides you with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Which is why pre-trial release is a thing. The government releases you after a short period of time, because you are presumed innocent. That said, the government can put conditions in that release in order to make in more likely you will return for the trial, such as requiring a bond. In this case, the defendant was released on a $1,000 bond and was out in the community when he was arrested by federal law enforcement (ICE) on suspicion of having violated federal immigration law. And because there is a high degree of probability that he will not return for an immigration hearing (having been deported once before and being out on bond for a DWI charge), a federal judge refused to give him bond prior to his immigration hearing. And due to that, ICE refused to hand him over to Harris County for trial on the DWI. This attorney is then arguing that it wasn't his client's fault for failing to appear for trial and he shouldn't have his bond revoked for failing to appear (and lose his $1,000).
"This county judge is expediting the process by issuing the ICE warrant for the federal immigration judge..."
Two things: a) No warrant is necessary as the defendant is already in ICE custody. b) State judges cannot issue warrants on the suspicion that someone may have violated federal law (as they have no authority to enforce that law). Which is also why Harris County will only hold them for ICE for up to 48 hours (the longest they can hold someone without seeing a judge for arraignment).
The rest doesn't follow, and what you've said thus far doesn't give me much reason to have confidence in anything you say.
If you get picked up by the next state and can’t attend court your bond would be revoked! So the defense is trying to steal the money from the state. Which I’m no fan of the state, take what you can from them. But, in fairness the bond should be revoked
Bond releases you from state/county custody...they can hold for Ice for 48 hours even with the bond...but once he is 'released' from state/county custody into the Federal ICE custody it is a different jurisdiction. He is Free from the custody of the state/county based upon his bond. But he broke Federal law and is now in their custody. Basically the lawyer is suggesting that they should be releasing his client because it has been more than 48 hours in custody but that 48 hour window only applies to the state/county detainment. He was given to Ice so that clock is reset. When he appears in court he does not return to state/county custody since he will still be under the custody of the federal government. Other than actually charging and sentencing him here( and him being deported after he serves his sentence) not sure what this achieves. Unless the lawyer is suggesting giving his client an opportunity for freedom to run away. However, if his client is still in the sherriffs custody after 48 hours with a bond posted then he has a point if he argued directly for his release. Of course, the judge would probably revoke his bond in lieu of his having been deported before his illegal status, a previous assault charge, and drunk driving. If he was a squeeky clean person who just committed the misdemeanor of illigally entering, that might be another situation entirely.
An excellent explanation for us lay persons. Thanks
A thorough explanation indeed! I was hoping you weren't stating that illegal entry into the United States was a misdemeanor 😂 Because it is a felony to enter the U.S.A illegally. And any crime that is committed by an illegal alien can get them deported. 8 U.S.Code 101-649 S 543 to 550 should explain a lot for some who are unsure of the laws of illegal entry into the United States. Also, even in municipal court,(city) as well as State/County, Federal courts, anyone who is in the U.S. on less than full citizenship can be deported for any crime that they've committed in the U.S. I've seen a man from Honduras get deported for 2 seatbelt tickets and no turn signal ticket. It can be for anything.
Thank you so much 😌
@@BigBabyJane You couldn’t be more wrong.
@WiseChild1987 My mother and father both worked for the Dept of immigration and have for more than 30 years. I highly doubt that what I've said is wrong. I'm nearly 50 years old myself and also work in the government sector. I'd be obliged for you to tell me where I'm wrong? Please,
This lawyer is too good for his own good... lol, and like I saw another comment , his face when he realized he said too much! lol
I'm not convinced. I think he was hoping very much that he wouldn't have to explain the likely outcome of a course that he may have an obligation to pursue. I like the judge, but I'm not clear that he is fully grasping the situation. Then again, maybe he does and Feldman is just inexperienced or a weasel
@@kcgunesqI've watched a fair few videos and Feldman mentions he has no past experience in criminal law and specialises in immigration law, from my perspective his a weasel, state is agreeing to a bench warrant without bond revocation out of good faith and he aim well at least openly thinks to do screw the state over, and mentioning it. client been deported once before
Sounds to me like Mr Feldman is trying to get his client released with some shady loophole so his client can escape. But what do I know.
@@markmcmillan6254 agreed bros been deported once before already and as previous criminal history in Texas
They (not this court) are trying to steal the $1,000 bond from his client and my guess is this lawyer has seen them do it many times so he's fighting for his client.
17:22 the way they just started 1 uping eachother like kids lmao
Lol. Judge Fleischer was basically warning the guy without explicitly saying it. The prosecutor is too cute.
The prosecution is mistaken to rely on ICE officers knowing the law.
They aren't. They are relying on them knowing if they will release him or not.
Ice don't care about the law
The defense lawyer wants to help an illegal alien stay in America.
@@cyclonicblade Your ideology has skewed your common sense .
@@somenygaard "common sense" now is knowing the ins and outs of ICE operating procedure? literally not "common sense" by any stretch of the imagination yet you wanna talk ideology? please 🙄🙄
Ice Detainers are not just for 48 hours. Harris County can hold for ICE in their jail as a courtesy hold. It is essentially the same as holding him in ICE custody. This happens everyday across the country.
An ice detainer is for 48 hours. That is local law enforcement can hold even after they have bonded out for up to 48 hours to allow ice time to get him in their custody. Their custody does not necessarily mean they have him physically, just that they have files the paperwork for legal custody to transfer. Some jurisdictions that politically do not like enforcement of immigration policy will not cooperate and demand ice take them in physical custody. This jurisdiction is one of those.
@@jasoncurrie5775Yeah those jurisdictions are disgusting because they care more about a political argument than they do of their own civilians. This case proves why it should never be allowed.
@@jasoncurrie5775 Holding longer than 48 hours after bonding out gets into habeus corpus type issues, which is what this defense attorney was totally trying to have. I guarantee that is what he was going to argue if his client was held for more than 48 hours.
Ice detainers are ridiculous in the first place. You broke the law, got caught, you stay in jail until you are tried and convicted or deported. No one should be roaming around our country if they have broken the law by entering illegally and then committing another crime.
Neither DHS nor local law enforcement has unlimited resources at its disposal. It is therefore necessary for every agency---at the federal, state, and local levels of law enforcement---to assess which conceivable allocation of available resources best supports its most urgent law enforcement priorities. This sort of legal triage happens every day in every agency within every jurisdiction throughout the country. Police, for instance, do not deploy all available officers to patrol the streets in a search for jaywalkers or perpetrators of minor traffic infractions, to the point of neglecting investigations of robberies, assaults, sex crimes, and murders. Similarly, prosecutors don't put equal effort into every prosecution. Instead, they evaluate 1) the strength of available witness testimony and forensic evidence, 2) the severity of the crimes that are alleged, 3) their likelihood of prevailing in court, 4) the level of expenditure that successful prosecution will likely require, 5) the likely sentencing outcomes, and 6) the likely political and public safety consequences of either bringing the case or opting for nolle prosequi instead. On the basis of such evaluations of these and other salient factors, leadership determines the optimal allocation of staff hours, talent, and funding.
Implicit in all of this is the inherent discretion of prosecutors to prioritize some prosecutions over others. Accordingly, they may agree to lesser charges, resulting in the imposition of lighter sentences and less severe adverse collateral consequences, in exchange for a swift and definite disposition or defendants' cooperation in future prosecutions of others. As justice dictates, they may even decline to prosecute altogether. Without such discretion, they would be required to prosecute every alleged instance of criminal conduct, to charge the highest conceivable offense, and to seek the maximum possible penalty in every prosecution until all available resources be exhausted. Inevitably, this would result in an increase in failed prosecutions based on trumped up charges arising from conduct that gives even slightest offense and a decrease in successful prosecutions of the worst and rarest crimes.
It works much the same for DHS. Immigration authorities do not have the resources necessary to facilitate the removal of every undocumented immigrant within the country. ICE detention and removal officers must therefore prioritize certain cases over others, focusing on the removal of those who represent a threat to public health, safety, and security first before turning their attention to those among the undocumented who have committed no crimes and whose removal doesn't advance public interests at the same level of importance as health, safety, and security.
The Constitution, which encapsulates the most supreme, most foundational laws of our society, does not permit indefinite detention of persons on the basis of mere accusations of criminal behavior---absent some judicial finding of being a flight risk or a threat to public health, safety, or security. Nevertheless, the judge here is claiming authority, despite such constitutional potections, to subject this defendant to indefinite detention even after his payment of the appearance bond set by the court as a condition of his release from custody, pending adjudication of the charges against him. The attorney's argument exposes an impermissible violation of the Constitution baked into structure of the system.
He’s been deported once. These cases just frustrate me. He commits another crime while here! The path is clear. No permission to be here? Go back. Period.
ICE wants to deport him. But if they deport him, they can't try him for the DWI. The judge wants to make sure he gets tried for the DWI *and then* deported.
@Just_Smile-n2w
That’s what he was trying to do but the Judge would not allow it. Speeding up the deportation process is what initiated all this.
That's basically what's happening but you have to go through a process to do so.
If he came here twice illegally, he'll do it again. Being deported doesn't stop some people apparently.
The problem is that the State may not be following the law.
This defense attorney is his own enemy. The judge agreed to not revoke his bond and then he tells the judge he was going to the sheriff in opposition to the court?
I'd say it's a good thing he did because if he hadn't mentioned it and went ahead and managed to get his client released - going behind the court's back - he'd be in a world of hurt. His slip let the Judge, a really stand-up guy, have the opportunity to give him some counsel on the ethical and legal ramifications if the attorney tried creating and exploiting a loophole - one only created by the Judge and District Attorney's office willing to give assistance through potentially deceptive reasoning.
The attorney didn't get bench-slapped, but now he knows that's a damn good possibility if he tries to pull off this stunt. Hopefully he thinks better about it, or consults another neutral attorney.
@jeffcokenour3459
You have a poor understanding of the law and what this lawyer is attempting to accomplish.
@@timothyboone5003so do you
@@timothyboone5003 oh look its the same guy running posting dumbshit all over the comments lol
I think you misunderstood the problem. The attorney was absolutely right in that 1. It’s not his client’s fault he missed court thus forfeiting the bond, 2. Once the judge reinstated the bond and issued the bench warrant to bring the detainee back to the municipal court, he can only be held for 48 hrs. The attorney was trying to save his client $1,000, save his client from unnecessary hassle when ICE eventually comes back for him and he’s not in a municipal jail cell, and save the judge’s skin by accidentally releasing a detainee who (if he didn’t have the ICE retainer) would be released with bond conditions. The bond conditions would have probably been alcohol testing, an interlock device, etc.
Well that was interesting. Hasn’t he ever heard the phrase, “dont tell the right hand what the left hand is going to do”?
As a civil engineering student, I was told by professors, “if you have the slightest doubt of whether something is unethical, it’s unethical.”
It’s absolutely wild that what he was planning to do didn’t trigger any internal red flags… it makes me wonder what other wild, probably legal but completely unethical things he’s done or will do in the future.
Your last bit there. In Accounting we're taught "Not Everything Legal is Ethical", I like to add "and everything Illegal is Unethical". It's only wild it went under the radar till he specifically said it because most people don't think people are so wildly unethical.
I know a little bit about law, learned it the hard way but learned it good, and you do NOT play these kinds of games in a court of law. I am not an attorney, so if I represent myself I can pull some dirty tricks and get away with them, because I don't have a law license to lose, mostly just to annoy my opponents or in some cases to lawfully challenge their ethics, such as filing a grievance against my opponent's attorney so that she could no longer represent my opponent against me due to conflict of interest (the ploy worked). Yeah, you're right about this guy. He'll do whatever it takes, whatever he can get away with. He's young, he may sacrifice his own future if he doesn't reel it in.
It’s a good rule to live by. Because it’s usually not one great big step into unethical territory. At least with accounting scandals like Enron/Arthur Anderson, it was a whole collection of tiny little steps (each justifiable on their own) that led to a place that was incredibly unethical when reviewed in hindsight.
There’s no advocacy in engineering. You could get disciplined for something ethical related to failing to advocate appropriately just as easily. It’s not as easy as you make it out to be.
Critically important for a CivE. Good for you for learning this lesson early.
What if this judge used social media to help maintain justice. Why is fairness in the court system blowing our minds with this judge? We are not use to this as citizens.
Because judges like him are rare most of them are employees of the state and thats all they care about is making as much money as possible no matter if they are screwing people over and they have no interest in helping people ive been infront of a few judges over the years i have two felony convictions that should have been thrown out but i was told I would go to prison unless i took plea deals years later once i grew up and got smarter i went through my motion of discovery and found out that they had zero evidence i had an attorney look it over and he said wow the state had zero evidence it never should have made it past the probable cause hearing the DA didn't care the judge didn't care my public defender didn't care they are all employees of the state this judge has no problem calling out the police or the DA when they falsely charge people
Judge Fleischer stated he became a judge because he wants equal justice for everyone. He took a huge pay cut.
I think that the lawyer is struggling to get his point across. Best bet is to go off the record and have a 1 on 1 chat with him to work out exactly what he is trying to explain. Because there is some huge disconnect in communication here.
Sounds like Feldman doesn't care as long as his client gets out so his client can ghost
I think you nailed it.
That's literally his job as an attorney, you donut. I've yet to meet an attorney whose personal mantra was: "Oh well, freedom would've been nice, but at least 10 years are not the death penalty. 🤷🏼♂️". 🤣
What about you? 🤗
@@HG_Budde r/whoosh
@soxpeewee
You must have been sleeping at the first or you would know his initial goal was to get his client back to his home Country before the holidays. But the Judge will not go for this. The lawyer did not ask or want to be placed in the position the Court placed him in. This lawyer deserves more praise than what most comments here give him.
@HG_Budde Finally, an attorney working for the people and not the court.
This lawyer is lying through his teeth. He is going to demand they release this man after 48 hours. The man will flee, and this whole game starts all over again.
@laurelwoodward2700
Just because you do not understand what you watched does not mean Mr Feldman is not being truthful with the Court. He has gone above and beyond to help the Court understand what could happen if they continue as planned.
All this effort to keep someone in this country who drinks and drives. Gee how glad I am to pay taxes.
@leapinglaura7343
Did I miss something? Who’s guilty of drinking and driving?
What an argument from each party. WOW. So many angles.
Judge is absolutely correct not revoking the bond is of course showing favoritism.
After the 48-hour period, if ICE has not taken you into custody, the jail must release you.
Yes, but he's in ICE custody now. The lawyer is going to try and get him back, wait 2 days and say ICE never picked him up and they must release him. That's not going to go well for him.
First; that's a policy and not a law. Second; the guy is in ICE custody.
Excellent case here, I love what the defense attorney is doing, brilliant. And I appreciate the honest and thoughtful responses from the judge. Is there a later hearing that we could see to know what happened?
How is nobody seeing what the defense is saying. They're trying to hold on an ICE detainer that says hold 48 hours, and that's it. A bench warrant was issued without a bond revocation... so the bench warrant gives permission to obtain the body, then ICE says the body can be held for 48 hours.. after 48 hours and no bond revocation he's being held for what?
In video it said dwi but the ice custody for illegally entering country for the second time took the federal charges above the state charges. This is state court while attorney is playing both sides trying to make anything happen.
Also I get the 48 release stipulation but only a fed judge can release. He needs held till deportation imo.
@@justanotheroglesby2847So they just take his bond... and then not let him go? How is that legal?
@ it’s kinda not. It just means the bond goes to state fines. A dwi after court costs and fines will actually be over a grand really so if anything he owes more but the feds supersede the state. Also they are going to take him before he’s right with them. It’s weird. So really everyone is screwed. Comes down to ice not doing their job in timely manner while having the final say.
@@justanotheroglesby2847 So you are presuming that he is found guilty in the state court. Otherwise what state fines?
Imagine it is you. They arrest you and set a bond. You post the bond, but do not let you out saying "Do not worry, that money will go toward your fines at sentencing". Don't you see it is backwards to talk about counting something towards the sentence before being found guilty?
I'd want this guy to represent me. Love the passion
Noah isn't playing with all the cards he thinks he has.
Yes he is
Ahhh i just watched the whole video but now i want to know what happens next..."will the attorney SAM request that he be released, will the judge issue a no bond, will Sarah come back from the dead and marry Edward, find out next week on Days of our Lives
Most people commenting here have zero idea what they are talking about.
Most people commenting on all court videos on YT have no understanding of how the law and courts truly operate. They base their opinions on the fictitious view they’ve gained from television shows.
Most people commenting about other people commenting are actually stupider than the original people commenting.
@@jimjambananaslam3596 If we follow your logic that would mean you commenting on others commenting on others says what about your intelligence 🤔
@@jimjambananaslam3596 You meta'd yourself.
@@yevettebrinegar6699 Bingo.
woah, looking forward to the follow up.
I want this lawyer!He came prepared AF!
Yes he did at every single possible solution. He spent hours on this case. He sounds like he gives his clients their money's worth and not just take money and not fight.
@@poultryhousefarmer well, it does sound like he's a public defender since he's on a salary. But good to know we the taxpayers are getting our monies worth😂
This started out crazy. Prosecution barging in, defendant on a computer screen, Wow! I knew it was going to be one for the books!
This was riveting!
As an attorney, I would have requested a modification to bond under which the court would change it to a PR bond with terms. After the bond modification, the $1,000 can be returned because it exceeds the amount necessary to secure his release. After the return, revoke him, and if ICE transports him you continue while he remains in ICE or Harris County custody. If he isn't turned over, when he is deported, continue to try the case in absentia, order a capias so if he returns and is picked up, he is to be brought before the court. The defendant could sign paperwork to be voluntarily absent, but that really shouldn't be necessary as a DUI is probably a misdemeanor charge.
Correct on the last at least: I know from other videos that this court doesn't hear felonies.
I'm certain you have to think about it in reverse: if a man is arrested on a warrant & posts bond, the county has to hold him for 48 hours in total to give ICE a chance to pick him up. In this case, ICE already 'picked him up', so the detention will stay until he is deported. There is no way for the Defendant to leave ICE custody once he was already in it and they have a deportation planned.
That makes sense, now. Thanks.
There are always to be transferred/transported to another law enforcement agency.
@hughjarse4205
Your close, at least you have given it more thought than most. If he is brought back for this Court hearing. He would no longer in in ICE custody. He has made bond on these charges, so he could only be held legally for 48 hours.
@@timothyboone5003 Are you sure that ICE would relinquish custody? I thought they could simply transport him to the hearing, keeping him in custody, then take him back to the detention center. His jail time is effectively over, but not his detention time. Does that make sense?
@@hughjarse4205 correct, that's usually how it goes
Interesting legal arguments.
The lawyer really messed up in saying what his true intentions were. He knew it, the judge knew it, prosecution knew it, we all knew it because it was written all over his face and body language. Really trying too hard to play the system, which will cost him. It seems ICE can snatch you off the street or from jail if you're in the country illegally and have you sit in detention until you're deported. It's totally irrelevant if you posted bond or not because of being an illegal and not a citizen.
@jeffreyhendricks3932
Why do you believe the lawyer messed up? He has been placed in a conundrum and has brought it to the Courts attention. Considering the situation he has been placed in, I believe he’s doing one hell of a job.
he didnt mess up anything. maybe slow the video down to half speed if you need so you can catch and process everything.
This is exactly why the law is the law and no favoritism is supposed to be shown
The amount of taxpayers money I just watched get flushed down the drain for absolutely no reason is just astonishing. Deport him and call it a day
We should deport you since you dont believe in due process in this country.
it's ridiculous that we even give them due process. we are far too generous and we get taken advantage of relentlessly because of it.
@ K bigot
@@iswmIf someone picked you up claiming you were not here legally, should we skip the whole due process thing or just deport you?
@gregg9226
That what he wanted but the Judge stopped it.
He 1000% not going to follow the rules and the code of ethics. And I hope he gets called out on it.
@MikeydeLaraCovers
The amount of 0 you place on an already fictitious statement will not make it more true. Without being able to identify one single perceived ethics violation, your comment is meritless.
@@timothyboone5003Your honor, id like to cite TH-cam Comment section law 1.1.34 which states that 98% of all comments are totally baseless and should be received as such. And also in Nevada v. Fegerson, where smarty pants who come off the top rope to shut down the lesser educated in said section should feel good for no more than 5 minutes after posting, or risk the chance of revealing how much of their lives are based in this digital universe.
@MikeydeLaraCovers
You are 2 for 2 on meritless comments.
Mr. Feldman is horrified that the Cartel is now coming after him. 😂
Oppsies!!
Lolz
Literally my thoughts too
Mr. Feldman is horrified that his client is being subjected to indefinite detention even after paying the appearance bond set by the court as a condition of his client's release from pre-trial detention.
Racist
3:42...the way she sighed as she puts her hands on her hips as if she thinks this is about to be a thing 😅
The government has no qualms about screwing over the average guy, over any whim. If a guy finds a legal loophole, let him use it. The judge can then go revoke his bond, after he's released and doesn't show up for court.
The government is elected by the people for and behalf the people they don't appoint themselves .
This isn’t a loophole though. The defendant wanted to plead guilty and get deported but the judge wanted him to come in person which started the whole argument. The guy is out on bond and hasn’t violated his bond so the judge can’t legally revoke it, and ICE can’t hold him in civil custody forever so the right thing to do is release him.
I give this dude a A for effort and doing the most. He will be one heck of a lawyer one day
He was deported once already soooooo why is he even here?!?!?
Because illegals do not care about our laws, until of course they are caught and get a tax payer paid lawyer.
I wish doctors be as good as this lawyer..... doing the best for the subject...
This lawyer is trying to represent his client using methods he thinks are loopholes. But what’s gonna happen is, they’re gonna sanction him and test his ability as a lawyer. And in the process he may get disbarred. He needs to go back to the books and make sure his moves are ordered in the steps of the law.
At the very least before going forward with ANY risky tactics he should have had lengthy discussions about it with other People who could have fixed any understanding confusions he might be having...but then again maybe ALL the other People he discussed it with also couldn't see any faults...
@AuntieKim
There’s no “loopholes” being played here. The lawyer is making the Court aware of the fact that the County can not legally keep the defendant in custody if the defendant has made a bond set by the Court itself. And that the hold ICE has placed upon the defendant is only good for 48 hours. At that point he would have to be released. The lawyer would not be representing his client to the best of his abilities if he did not demand his client’s release after that 48 hours.
The lawyer deserves recognition for his zealous representation, while at the same time threading a fine line of the catch 22 situation the Court has placed him in. He’s doing an amazing job considering his situation and the fact he is an appointed lawyer.
@@timothyboone5003 It's great to point out inconsistencies and errors of course...but when the judge starts warning...it's time to concede defeat and count it as a learning experience for next time. Reflect and ask yourself if your ego is getting in your own way or if you missed something
Really, not.
its not loopholes its lawyering
I always find it crazy in cases like this where it's argued that everyone else should follow the law and let this person continue breaking the law.
Mann! Judge is amazing. To hold court like that with no anger or able to hide it well. His first sentence on zoom i knew what he was trying to do. He's in too deep.
PLEEEEEEEEASE POST A FOLLOW UP ON THIS!!!! THIS WAS REALLY GOOD!!!
The state has all the money power and influence and for a lawyer to take it to the line is admirable. Mr Feldman is an awesome attorney and I would want him to represent me.
Feldman chased this one down too hard. He could've gotten what he wanted if he had just played his cards and kept his mouth shut.
Yes if he said nothing then if ICE did not pick him up then the jailer would contact the court, then they'd either have to A. Release him, B. Get him to court right away (which is still iffy with no bond revocation) or C. Revoke the bond.
He got what he wanted but kept running his mouth.
@ShawnChristopher10101
You seem to magically forget that all Mr Feldman and his client wanted was to plead guilty to all charges. Doing this would help expedite his deportation. They didn’t want or ask for all these other shenanigans the Court has caused.
The lawyer seems to have his heart in the right place and is working hard for his client and the judge of course is his usual fair and unbiased self. But here I think it's a case of the lawyer trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Defendant has already been deported, is a flight risk and still breaks the law. He needs to be held and booted out of this country.
Is the lawyer trying to get him released by the judge since he paid bond and out of ice custody?
Yea he's trying to loop hole his client out of jail. He's trying to get him out of federal custody into state custody. Then once in state custody he knows it'll take time to get him into court, so he's going to go in and say to release him from state custody since he's paid his state bonds.
@cyclonicblade he should have kept his mouth shut though cause he told the judge his plan. He could have just got him out after 48 hours if he didn't keep speaking. Sometimes less is more. Even lawyers talk to much.
He needs a court show on TV 🎉hes a breath of fresh air
He tries to play a game... but then told everyone all the moves he was making and then demanded they play the way he wanted it... idiot.
Couldn't disagree more.
The Judge says he follows the law.
....unless it doesn't suit his end goal.
The judge is playing a game. He's crossing two different laws
I think the confusion is the warrant for the body is separate from the bond. If the judge can bench warrant ordinarily without a bond yet in place, and have jurisdiction over the body until the court decides its business is done, then there is no issue with it. In other words A) is bench warrant and B) is bond. Defense is over thinking unless the rules combine the two. Great example of advocacy. Loved him zooming in his client's appearance.
If he is in the country illegally, why would he be eligible for bail?
because his status as an illegal immigrant is a federal matter and has no legal relevance in a state court beyond necessary coordination with federal agencies. State courts deal with state laws, federal court deals with federal laws. The only time that they should intersect is when state law interferes with federal law, which at that point federal courts determine whether it interferes with explicit federal powers. But all other times they don't consider the other's legal process.
Just get him to safety
before the trumpets start playing
Why not?
Simply unbelievable!
He’s going to drive the courtroom to drink 🍻.
That's what courts are for--to vet the arguments thoroughly. Good thing you're not a lawyer or judge.
If only every lawyer was this zealous when it came to representing their client. I do think he was thinking upon his return he would be released and don't see this was in any way breaking the law. At most it would be taking advantage of the kindness of the judge! Kudos to the attorney for thinking outside the box.
They call this tactic the “Feldman Fuggery”
In my country an answer of “I don’t know what to tell you” is never an acceptable answer from a judge. If a lawyer comes with a legal argument then the judge must cone with a legal argument too.
“I’m not afraid judge”- says the immigration attorney as his voice goes up and octave and starts to get less and less sure of his argument. I understand making a zealous argument for your client- and he initially did so. But he constantly over talked the prosecutor and the judge MULTIPLE times And he knew it bc he’d peek up from his papers to see how they reacted. I have a hard time calling his arguments appropriate when he cuts off everyone. Its obvious watching the 2nd part, that he was relying on ‘surprising’ the prosecution but entering 10 exhibits and expecting to jump straight into arguments trying to keep the prosecutors from looking over the case law he was sighting etc. I’ll admit I don’t know all the ins and outs of haw or if our constitution applies to someone who is proven here illegal but I’m curious. Plus he’s ALREADY been deported before- my empathy is running low for him or his attorney
Our Constitution covers anyone and everyone that’s within our borders.
Our Constitution applies equally to anyone within our borders, regardless of their citizenship or immigration status.
I dont think he was less sure of his argument, just more afraid of the consequences.
@jessica.cash3
The lawyer is doing one hell of a job considering the conundrum he has been placed in.
@@timothyboone5003are you replying to every single comment for a particular reason? Emotional doesn’t mean you’re correct.
I respect the defense on this one, I also respect Judge Fleischer as well on this. This is how you represent your client...
So a person can have their bond revoked for actions they didn't do? Seems weird. I don't think anyone should be released from jail when they do a felony when sneaking into this country. Because when a person sneaks into the country its against the law and a felony charge. They have no rights to be free. Some countries have the death penalty when you sneak into their country. This country goes light on the people.
Which countries have the death penalty if you sneak in their country? 🤔
@esdee878 most countries will charge a person with espionage even if they are not doing that. So china, Saudi arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, and North korea are just a handful of countries that can put you to death for that. We even trade lots with China and lots of people go to travel there. Best know the laws of different countries and not think the rest of the world has the same laws as the west.
@@SqueakyWheelMakesNoise that doesn't happen on a regular basis. Each person entering a country illegally isn't going to be charged with espionage. You watch way too many movies. It does happen, just not as frequently as you describe.
@@esdee878 and even though it's 2024 I bet you don't think people are purchased as slaves in an open market. You live in a small make believe world. Lots of bad countries out there. Property don't have rights.
Millions of "illegal immigrants" in the US committed no crime of "sneaking in". They came in legally on visas and then simply stayed, which is not a crime.
The lawyer putting on Mike Ross suit 😂😂😂
Go behind the courts back... what a joke... the lawyer stated the law it's written.. he's just a badass defense attorney and the judge isn't use to someone actually fighting for their client like that... whoever this guy is just got contacted by the cartels 😅😂
There's no law stating Harris County has to release his client after 48 hours. The guy is *in* ICE custody. There's no issue with Harris keeping him in custody *for* ICE while dealing with his DUI trial.
At 1:00 I love how judge is just staring at him 😂
Mr Feldman is one or two steps away from being disbarred
Maybe not immediately disbarred, but a reprimand would fit nicely.
For trying to do the right thing
@@LNR21then he won't be showing integrity whilst dealing and communicating with the court and all parties involved which is breaking the Texas State BAR oath
Why?
He has already thought this through.
Looked at the law.
The law states that a hold can only occur for 48 hours.
When a bond has been issued it cannot be revoked except for certain reasons.
One of the first things the lawyer said was that he didn't want the bond revoked.
The person, presumed innocent, has not willfully broken any bond conditions.
He has been forced by ICE (civilly, and legally).
I don't see what the issue is to try to get your client out of jail by using the law.
It seems to me what they have always done might have broken the law and people have been sitting unlawfully.
What is the basis for a grievance on this man?
Avoiding telling the court his intentions?
The lawyer was very clear that he didn't believe there was a legal basis to hold him more than 48 hours.
Now. I really like this judge. He is exceptionally fair.
Him being one who actually looks at PC despite what has found afterwards is extremely admirable.
But my view is that the lawyer is excellent and doing a thankless job.
That might not always sit right with the court.
But his client isn't the court. His client is in custody and the job of the lawyer is to get him out (lawfully).
The lawyer has an obligation to "candor to the tribunal".
Not an obligation to tell the court how he is going to try to maneuver the case to find the best result.
Which would include the intricacies and perhaps holes in the law when it comes to two sovereigns.
The Federal and the State.
The law is in the defendants favour on this case. Mr Feldman is using the legal process to benefit his client: the prosecution pointing this out as an abuse is irrelevant if he is advocating for his client within the rule of law
No way should someone get released if they are on an ice hold.
The guy literally has already been deported and he’s here committing offenses.
Guilty, deport, and wait for him to return….
His lawyer is tripping over a $$1000 that he doesnt want his client to loose. Wtf, if hes out of country he wont get his money back for showing up.
He should be deported. Wasting Harris county workers money 💰💰💰
He almost had this case in a misjudgment and got nervous and fumbled the bag. He never would of thought of the loophole before he wanted to "double check"
ICE: how do i feel today…
Ok you can gave him. I dont like him anyway
Do you English can write?
The defense attorney reviewed his hand! He asked for a favor and was going to use it to get his client out. Why is he so concerned about the bond of an illegal alien? Will it be used to pay him?
Mr. Feldman thinks he had found a loophole. Mr. Feldman may find himself in contempt.
@MrSmith0128
Where’s the “loophole”? The lawyer is bound by a code of ethics. He’s being fully forthcoming with the Court. The Court has failed to recognize the catch 22 situation the lawyer is in.
TRUE.
You wouldn’t know what qualifies for a contempt hearing even if it smacked you in your head.
Exactly
@@timothyboone5003 He has no catch 22. He's going to try to claim that ICE never picked him up on their hold and have him released even though they did. It's not a loophole, it's someone who is gonna get himself in trouble by subverting ju stice.
In order to do what he's planning to do, he has essentially lie. ICE has ahold on him, they used that hold within 48 hours. If they release him back into the sheriff's custody, that doesn't negate that. If he tries to claim the 48 hour rule, he's setting himself up for a bad time.
It don’t matter what you’re intentions are if you have a judge telling you on the record that you better be careful of ethics violations I’d sit that one out
It’s not Mr Feldman’s fault the judge refuses to understand.
If you want defense to actually work; you don't sanction defense attourneys for anything remotely plausible.