Kendall Coffey- Everything Points to Political Division

Our country is more divided than ever, particularly along party lines. Americans are not longer united by their citizenship, rather they are divided by their political parties: Democrat or Republican. Of course, there are those who fall in between, but the power of the two major political parties leaves any other options out of the running most of the time.

Any number of happenings in the U.S. provide clear demonstrations for just how divided we are. Pick a topic: health care, international relations, national debt, economic style… the list goes on and on, and the two parties can’t agree on a single thing. Miami attorney Kendall Coffey points out the singular fact that both parties were sure they’d win this election right up until the very end—“Further proof that the two political parties can hardly agree on anything.”

Despite national polls, the Republican Party had a secret vote monitoring system that was supposed to keep them updated with all the latest, most accurate, information. As it turned out, Orca had some major malfunctioning going on, and as one aide said, “Orca is lying on the beach with a harpoon in it.”

We’re finally past the election now, and our country is still facing some big issues that can’t be solved unless we stop bickering like children and actually come together. President Obama can certainly afford to be more aggressive in his policymaking in his second term, but it would be so much better for our country if the two parties would get over their differences and try to work out a solution that will get our country on the right track.

Washington is full of intelligent individuals—but they all have closed their hearts and ears to anyone who thinks differently. It’s time to open them back up and let reason in. It’s clear that when we work separately, as Kendall Coffey points out, we overlook some pretty important things.

Read more from Kendall Coffey on his Miami twitter.

Kendall Coffey offers suggestions to unemployed law graduates

It's no surprise to anyone that the current job market for lawyers is bad.  But the problem is there is a great many law students who went into their education thinking that, if they worked hard, they would stand a good chance of a high-paying job once they graduated.  So they burnt the candle at both ends, saddled themselves with massive amounts of student loans, and set out to get a law degree.

Only to find that the market is saturated with experienced lawyers who were let go from their positions and that no one is hiring.

What is a law school graduate supposed to do?

Perhaps what is needed is not more jobs, but a reworking of the current system.  Perhaps law students shouldn't expect to work for a law firm where they'll be billed out at $250 an hour but should instead set out to work for themselves and serve a middle class which desperately needs legal advice but can't afford the rates of the big firms.

"Ironically, while thousands of new law graduates fret about the chronic joblessness that awaits them, tens of millions of Americans need attorneys but cannot afford them. And much of the unmet need rests in America's middle class, which is neither rich enough to pay $250 an hour for lawyers nor poor enough to qualify for legal aid organizations."

Those are the words of Kendall Coffey, a Miami lawyer, legal analyst, and author of Spinning the Law.  Kendall suggests that legal students and law schools should reexamine the way they see the legal field and should change to fit the current environment and the rampant unemployment that awaits law school graduates.

In his piece at Law.com, Kendall writes that, with prudent office economics, there's no reason why recent law graduates can't launch successful practices. The problem is that their current education neither gives them any background in how to do this nor even prepares them for the idea.  Instead law schools still teach to a model which is quickly becoming obsolete.

He suggests turning to current lawyers in order to mentor these new fledglings, "leaders of the bar are well positioned to emphasize that placing many graduates in successful careers is more important than placing a few in traditional law firms. While prestige is nice, it does not pay monthly mortgages, much less student loans."

Indeed.  And the quicker schools can get this idea through their heads, the better. 

MSNBC questions atypical police protocol in Trayvon Martin case

The widely publicized Trayvon Martin killing raised some serious questions about police protocol, the ‘stand your ground’ law in Florida, and the friction that racial and ethnic boundaries are causing in the state.

Originally, the night the event took place, the police chose not to arrest George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin, despite the recommendation of the lead investigator, Chris Serino. The case was initially deemed a self-defense case because of the ‘stand your ground’ law that would allow Zimmerman to forcefully defend himself without the obligation to flee from the alleged attack.

In an interview with MSNBC following the news of the incident, legal commentator and former US Attorney Kendall Coffey discussed the case while examining data gathered by the news team.

The reaction from the authorities was atypical, especially considering that those who overruled the leading investigator were officials who were not at the scene of the crime. “…The lead investigator, the person that normally law enforcement would say is in the best position to assess whether or not there’s probable cause [for arrest, was] effectively overruled by people sitting back at the office,” said Kendall Coffey, adding that the scenario raised questions.

Though new information has unraveled since Feb. 26, the night of the incident, the case proceeds, unraveling new facts and triggering profound emotion and concern. 

'Stand your ground' controversy spikes in Trayvon Martin case

Hypothetical Situation:  A young man wanders around an area with which he is unfamiliar. It’s nighttime and he has somewhere to be but he’s not quite sure how to get there. His eyes meet with those of a stranger, wary of his presence. They exchange unfriendly words. Words give way to actions and soon the young man is dead. The older man killed him.

According to Florida’s ‘stand your ground’ law, someone who is being attacked or is facing an imminent threat may forcefully defend himself without the requirement to flee. Therefore, the older man, the one who’s still living in the above scenario, can invoke ‘stand your ground’ and pass the murder off as self-defense without facing any backlash. Many would consider this scenario an unfortunate encounter when an adolescent boy messed with the wrong man.

However, consider that this was perhaps not the older individual’s first run-in with the law. Would his claim of self-defense become less credible if he had a criminal history? What if this history included robbery, assault, or battery? Would he still be capable of cloaking himself in ‘stand your ground’ if he had one previous arrest? Two? Three?

Reporters at the Miami Herald uncovered the statistics behind who exactly was benefitting from ‘stand your ground.’

According to the Herald, “Nearly 60 percent of those who claimed self-defense had been arrested at least once before the day they killed someone… More than 30 of those defendants, about 1 in 3, had been accused of violent crimes, including assault, battery or robbery. Dozens had drug offenses on their records… Killers have invoked ‘stand your ground’ even after repeated run-ins with the law. Forty percent had three arrests or more. Dozens had at least four arrests.”

Legal experts like Kendall Coffey are skeptical of the controversial law. Of course, it is an inherently problematic law, because, as Coffey noted, “It would be impractical to try and apply the law differently between those who do and don’t have records. And frankly, it would be unfair.”

Obviously having a previous criminal record shouldn’t preclude someone from protecting himself when the situation warrants it. However, a guilty man should not be able to so easily invoke a law designed to protect the innocent, and run free.

“The legislators wrote this law envisioning honest assertions of self-defense, not an immunity being seized mostly by criminal defendants trying to lie their way out of a murder,” said Kendall Coffey.

Though the law would work well to protect an innocent person defending himself, it appears as though more guilty individuals have benefitted from its enactment. Legal experts like Kendall Coffey and a significant amount of Florida citizens would prefer that the law be curtailed. Time will tell whether ‘stand your ground’ has a future in Florida.  

Former South Florida U.S. Attorney joins McDermott Will & Emery

It has recently been announced that former U.S. Attorney Marcos Jimenez has joined McDermott Will & Emery to help build a white collar and business litigation team in both Miami and New York.

Jimenez has a wealth of deep trial experience, especially with health care clients, and figured prominently in a case brought against Alltel by the Florida State Attorney General.  He obtained a final judgement in Alltel's favor after an investigation that stretched over nine years. 

Kendall Coffey, another former U.S. Attorney from Miami, Fl  and partner with Coffey Burlington commented on the move.  

"They are a very lucky law firm to get him," Coffey said. "Mark is a superstar and has a huge impact wherever he goes."