Boulder, CO—For Josh Maximon, a life devoted to the law started with a personal tragedy.

“My dad was a larger than life character, but when I was just ten years old, he died tragically,” Maximon told laws.com in a recent interview.  “He died under suspicious circumstances and I felt robbed of my time with him.  This was a turning point in my life. It led me to want to do something with my life and fight for justice.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

Maximon, who worked in law offices in London, New York and Denver before starting his own firm, Mann & Maximon, believes that the biggest challenge for trial lawyers today is that they are continually interacting with certain prosecutors and judges who are led by fear.  This sometimes prevents judges from honoring people's rights, and as a criminal defense attorney, we have to get prosecutors and judges to recognize the proper limits of the law, including the appropriate recognition of individual rights by law enforcement.”

 This is often a particular challenge for new criminal defense attorneys, according to Maximon.  “You must have confidence in what you are doing, and don't let a situation or another lawyer or judge intimidate you.  Let your preparation and hard work carry through,” he says.  “I have witnessed other attorneys in court let the prosecutor and judge intimidates them.  I never let anyone buckle me down, and I remain confident in my convictions.”

That confidence led to courtroom victories, which in turn have caused Maximon to win many accolades.  Super Lawyers named him a 2013 Super Lawyer in Colorado, and he was named one of the Top 100 Trial Lawyers by the National Trial Lawyers Association, as well as a Top 100 Litigation Lawyer by The American Society of Legal Advocates.  He is a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum.  He has also lectured for Stanford University on topics relating to international policy.

Now that he runs his own firm, Maximon is able to pick and choose which cases he takes.  To do that, he says, “I learn my client’s stories first.  I take the time to listen to their case.  The need to capture and tell that story motivates me to work on a case.  I root for the underdog—people appreciate stories about an underdog.”

Maximon has worked alongside other renowned attorneys, including defense legend Bryan Stevenson, on high profile cases.  “I worked with Bryan Stevenson on a case where the defendant was on death row,” Maximon recalls.  “It was a juvenile case that was overturned when the Supreme Court changed the law such that juveniles could not be sent to death row.”

One of the biggest decisions for defense attorneys is to recommend whether their clients should accept a plea agreement.  “It's a really difficult decision, and a lot of times, it is motivated by how much that person has to lose,” Maximon says.  “For example, if you are working on a sex offender case and your client is given an offer that is favorable to them, they have to weigh the risks of potentially losing at trial.  The decision is made by the client with a strong recommendation by the lawyer, but a lot of times, it's driven by the draconian consequence of losing.”

Maximon has simple, timeless advice for any would-be attorneys who want an edge in the courtroom:  “Work hard.  Pay attention to every little detail.  Strict preparation is what makes you stand out from the pack.”

Maximon is a Colorado native and lives in Boulder with his family and is a sports fanatic. He played professional soccer in Slovakia and says that having lived outside the US has made it easier for him to relate to people and to have a more complete and compassionate picture of humanity.

To learn more about Josh Maximon and his practice click here.

Shelton, CT—Richard Thomas Meehan decided to specialize in criminal law the day he saw his father win a big verdict.

“As a 1L, I was assisting my dad, who was trying a murder case in our old Superior Court building,” Meehan recalled in a recent interview with laws.com.  “The case was a sensational murder case, and the jury deliberated far into the night, returning a verdict of 'not guilty' at about 10 PM.  The room was electric, the tension and anticipation after the jury knocked on the door to announce that it had a verdict was like a drug to me—I was hooked.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

Nearly four decades later, Meehan has received a great level of success and has received numerous accolades for his zealous trial work.  He is a fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers- named one of the top 100 trial lawyers in Connecticut and of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, limited to the top 500 litigators in the United States.   

His skill and achievements have led him to also  be certified as a Criminal Trial Specialist by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. 

As a Criminal Trial Specialist,  Meehan believes that defendants and defense lawyers are facing an uphill battle.  “One of the biggest challenges is the increasing presence of private video surveillance systems,” he says.  “The recent use of those in apprehending the Boston bombers is an excellent illustration.”

However, according to Meehan, those same systems can also be used to the defense's advantage when a defendant is innocent.  “I represented a fellow who had once been convicted of stalking a former lover.  She continued to try to have him arrested each time there was a chance encounter,” he recalls, saying that in one of these arrests, the accuser said the defendant had pulled up behind her at a gas station.

When the video from the gas station came out, though, it showed something different: “The video showed her actually pulling into the gas station, apparently having recognized his car, and then she pulled out in front of him and called her friend, who was a local cop, complaining that he was right behind her,” Meehan says.  The state dropped the pending cases against his client.

When it comes to young attorneys entering the profession, Meehan says that the biggest challenge is “the lack of trial opportunities.  Because of the proliferation of pre-trial diversionary programs and the crush of cases in the system, many do not know how to build a viable defense.”

A lack of available cases has also made it too easy for criminal defense lawyers to bite off more than they can chew, according to Meehan.  “We have such a crush of new lawyers that there is not enough business to go around.  Young lawyers will take cases way beyond their ability and experience level.  Learning how to seek a mentor, even if one is a sole practitioner hanging out a shingle for the first time, is crucial.”

One of the biggest factors leading to a lack of trial experience in young defense lawyers is the fact that very few cases proceed to trial at all today.  “A recent opinion from the US Supreme Court noted that in excess of 97 percent of all federal prosecutions and 94 percent of state prosecutions nationwide resolve with pleas,” Meehan says.  “Trials are expensive and risky—they are the last resort of the truly innocent or the unrepentant guilty.”

Most recently, Meehan has come to the forefront of criminal litigators in the State of Connecticut as lead counsel to Bridgeport’s Mayor Joseph Ganim in defense of a 24-count federal public corruption indictment.

Outside the courtroom, Meehan, together with members of his family, founded the Christian Meehan Hope Foundation for SIDS in recognition of his infant grandson, Christian Tomas Meehan, who succumbed to SIDS in 2003. He also considers himself an avid sportsman – accomplished flyfisherman, boater and motorcycle enthusiast.

To learn more about Richard Meehan and his practice click here.

Largo, FL—While many defense attorneys would say that murder cases are the most complex cases to work on, John Trevena begs to differ.

“In my experience, I would say that DUI Manslaughter cases are the most complex, because sometimes you are representing people who have no criminal history, but are facing a double digit prison sentence for that type of offense,” Trevena told laws.com in a recent interview. “Sometimes you are representing professionals or mothers who are not alcoholics or frequent drinkers, but are faced with this type of criminal offense for a single mistake. They don't expect this type of punishment.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

For Trevena, who started practicing law in 1986, criminal defense was a natural specialty to work in. “I was a criminal justice major in undergraduate school,” he explains. “I was working as a police officer while attending law school, and after I received my juris doctorate, I was a prosecutor, so it seemed very natural for me to get into criminal law.”

One of Trevena's proudest moments in a case came when he was able to successfully vacate the conviction of Jean Claude Meus, a Haitian immigrant truck driver who had been convicted of vehicular homicide after prosecutors alleged that he caused an accident by falling asleep at the wheel.

“At that time, Jennifer Porter, a 29 year old part-Cuban woman widely perceived to be white, had received three years of probation, two years of house arrest and 500 hours of community service after leaving the scene of a car accident in which she struck two children, who later died,” says Trevena. “Meus, on the contrary, stayed at the scene and cooperated with investigators, but was charged with homicide.”

The accident, which killed a 40 year old woman and her daughter, was not regarded as a homicide even by the family of the victim, according to Trevena. “His case was striking enough that two sisters of the woman killed in the accident took up his cause, arguing that his trial wasn't fair. No alcohol or drugs were found in his system,” he explains. “I stuck with the case pro bono and was successful at having the conviction vacated and Mr. Meus released from prison."

Today's clients are more likely than ever to take plea deals instead of going to trial, and Trevena says that this is partly due to the resources available in the court system. “I believe that the system does not have the financial ability to sustain the number of defendants entitled to a jury trial. If everyone were to exercise their right to a jury trial, the system wouldn't be able to function.”

Plea bargains are also more common because courts have a perceived tendency to punish people who exercise their right to go to trial, Trevena explains: “As much as we may like to believe that the system does not punish those who take their case to trial, this is not true. This is, of course, improper and unethical, but at the same time, the courts justify it by saying that due to circumstances and facts arising during the course of the trial, it is okay to give a defendant a harsher sentence than the one presented in plea deal negotiations.”

The biggest piece of advice Trevena has to offer new attorneys is to care about their clients, not the rest of the players in the courtroom. “Don't be concerned about making friends with the prosecution or the judge,” he says. “Your role is to zealously advocate for your client. I see so many attorneys today who worry too much about what the prosecutor may think of him or her.”

To learn more about John Trevena and his practice click here.

Greenville, NC—After working for over 20 years in the legal profession, first as a prosecutor and then as a defense lawyer, Keith Williams believes that what he's doing today is one of the most important jobs in the system.

“In my opinion, those who want to limit the government, like conservatives, should be very supportive of the criminal defense lawyer function,” Williams told laws.com in a recent interview.  “In the United States Constitution, there is only one type of attorney that is mentioned: a criminal defense attorney.  The Founding Fathers of this country said that those accused of a crime shall have a right to counsel.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

As the only attorney in Greenville who is board certified by the North Carolina Board of Legal Specialization in both state and federal criminal law, Williamssees cases ranging from misdemeanors to murders.

In the last two decades, Williams has seen significant changes to the criminal defense profession, and one of the biggest of those changes has to do with plea deals.  “I have seen fewer and fewer cases go to jury trial,” he explains.  “Our challenge as criminal defense attorneys is to change this and not conform to the norm, and to take more cases to trial.”

Williams thinks that it is the duty of criminal defense attorneys to try cases in front of juries when possible, in order to keep the system working.  “Criminal defense attorneys should resurrect the model of taking cases to the jury.  It reinforces what we were meant to do as defense attorneys and our system of checks and balances,” he says.

According to Williams, it wasn't always like this—defense attorneys decades ago operated very differently, taking many more cases to trial.  “I think back on the role models I had back in the day, when I went to law school, and how different things are today,” he reflects.  “My knowledge of that vision is one of the most important things I can pass on to the next generation of attorneys.  They have to know this vision, so they know there is another path they can take.”

To that next generation of attorneys, Williams gives clear advice: “Today, there are more and more people attending law school, so the pool is too large for someone to just go to law school and just hope for the best.  I would suggest going to law school with a plan.”

Williams also takes questions on a television and radio call-in show, “Call the Law,” which airs in and around Greenville.  Once a week, Williams' co-host, Don Higley, answers questions about civil law while Williams takes on criminal law questions from regular people.

For Williams, a successful career in criminal defense has meant giving great service to clients, handling their cases from beginning to end instead of shuffling them off to paralegals.  It also means returning phone calls fast and really listening to client concerns.  “I have always looked at a criminal defense lawyer as a person who has a vitally important role in our society,” he says.  “I was happy to step into those shoes and do this type of work.”

Williams recognizes that bad things happen to good people and that is what motivates him to zealously advocate for his clients. His hard work has earned him numerous recognitions, including being named one of the best trial lawyers by The National Trial Lawyers.

To learn more about his practice click here. 

Jacksonville, FL—After time working as one of Florida's top prosecutors and one of its best defense attorneys, Harry Shorstein knows juries.

“I have always felt that, starting from your first contact with the jury, you try to develop a relationship with the jury members, who are the ultimate decision makers,” Shorstein told laws.com in a recent interview.  “The jury picks up on many things, such as the way you address the court and the witnesses, as well as opposing counsel.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

Knowing juries has meant being able to tell how cases are going before the verdict is returned. He says: “I have always felt I could tell whether I am losing or winning the case by looking at the jury as I address them.  I could always tell what the verdict is before it is given just by the way I communicate with the jury.”

A fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, Shorstein has been named the best attorney in the Jacksonville area for white collar criminal defense.  His private practice work for Shorstein & Lasnetski comes after five terms working as the State Attorney for Florida's Fourth Judicial Circuit, which covers Duval, Clay and Nassau counties.  In his current role, he has represented defendants facing criminal charges ranging from DUI to murder to all varieties of white collar crimes in State and federal courts.

During his work as a prosecutor, Shorstein implemented a juvenile rehabilitation program that was considered one of the best in the world.  Profiled on 60 Minutes and NBC's Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, the system Shorstein implemented in Florida was responsible for lowering juvenile arrests for violent felonies, weapons offenses, and car thefts by more than 50 percent.

Part of that program, Shorstein says, was just keeping kids in school.  “Studies show that serious juvenile offenders begin as habitual truants,” he explains, “so a key component of this program is keeping children in school—even if it means jailing their parents for not sending them.”

Shorstein thinks it is important to address juvenile crime, because this gives attorneys “the best opportunity to rehabilitate our youth.”

Today, defense lawyers face many challenges in and out of the courtroom.  Shorstein believes that some of the biggest challenges for public defenders and the people they represent is a lack of funding.  “Indigent people deserve the same defense as those who are wealthy enough to hire a defense lawyer,” he says.

Mandatory minimum sentences have also had an unfair impact on sentencing and criminal defendants, according to Shorstein.  “All homicides, robberies, and other crimes are not the same, therefore, the sentence shouldn't be the same,” he says.  “It doesn't make any sense having legislators in Florida or Washington mandating certain sentences.”

Shorstein also believes that the media have a part to play in making criminal trials fairer: “What we need is for the media to have a better understanding of the law, and to report on cases thoroughly and correctly.  These issues are complex, and therefore a lot of investigation and analysis of cases is required before people start talking and writing about them.”

Recently, U.S. Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio selected Shorstein to join the panel that recommends federal judges, prosecutors and marshals for Florida's Middle District. In 2010, he was nominated to become U.S. attorney for Florida’s Middle District.

With close to five decades practicing law Shorstein has developed extensive skills and experience in the representation of professionals in civil litigation and defendants on criminal matters in state and federal court.

To learn more about Harry Shorstein and his practice click here.

Joe Arpaio

Joe Arpaio is a controversial Arizona sheriff known for his strong, often provocative views on the detention and legal treatment of Hispanic citizens. He was elected to the position of sheriff of Maricopa County in 1992 and has been re-elected every four years since. Joe Arpaio has been the subject of many investigations and lawsuits related to his practices.

One prominent investigation of Joe Arpaio was conducted by the FBI. This investigation was initiated in 2008 at the request of Phil Gordon, then serving as the mayor of Phoenix, who claimed he was one of many people who had been targeted for legal action at the behest of Joe Arpaio. After two years of investigation regarding potential abuses of power, the FBI expanded the scope of its investigation to determine if any state crimes had been committed.

One of the crimes allegedly committed by employees working for Joe Arpaio concerned misuse of credit cards which use public funds to pay for certain expenses. In its investigation, the FBI and Department of Justice determined that though the financial records being maintained were inadequate, there was no evidence of misuse of public funds as such.

Another of the crimes allegedly committed under Joe Arpaio concerned the misuse of $84 million allocated for jails. Investigating complaints filed by county supervisors, the FBI investigation determined that the money had been used to pay salaries and expenses unrelated to maintenance of the jail. However, there was no evidence to suggest that Joe Arpaio had derived a personal profit from this misuse of funds. Therefore, the FBI declined to press charges against Joe Arpaio, since it would be impossible to prove that this misuse occurred with criminal intentions. As a result of the failure to find criminal intent in any actions committed by Joe Arpaio or his employees, the FBI ended its investigation after four years in 2012. 

Another lawsuit against Joe Arpaio which has yet to receive a resolution stems from the 2007 arrest of Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, a Mexican citizen who was visiting the United States legally. Following his arrest, Melendres was unlawfully detained for nine hours before being released. Melendres filed suit against Joe Arpaio that year and was soon joined by a number of other Latino plaintiffs, who alleged that they had been stopped and detained by the Maricopa County police solely on the basis of their ethnicity. The lawsuit alleges that the unlawful detention is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that the strategy of targeting Latinos is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause as enumerated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

The case has yet to reach a verdict. Pending his decision, district court judge Murray Snow issued an injunction forbidding Joe Arpaio and the Maricopa County sheriff's department from conducting any further arrests or detentions on a racial basis. In December of 2011, Murray Snow also issued an injunction forbidding arrest or detention based solely on suspicion of the arrestee being an illegal immigrant.

Zacarias Moussaoui

Zacarias Moussaoui is a convicted terrorist who was involved in the planning of the attacks of September 11, 2001. His role in the attacks dated to a period between the end of February of 2001 to the end of May. During this time, Zacarias Moussaoui took flight lesson training with the goal of participating in the attacks. However, a decision was made not to include him in the plot, of which he was aware.

In August of 2001, Zacarias Moussaoui was arrested for immigration violations and detained. Following the events of September 11, he was named by another member of Al Qaeda as another jihadist with knowledge of the plot. Subsequently, in December of 2001 Zacarias Moussaoui was indicted by a grand jury on six charges, all related to his knowledge of the conspiracy and failure to report it to American authorities.

From 2002 to 2005, a series of appeals and legal rulings delayed the start of the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. During this time, Zacarias Moussaoui met with a psychiatrist who determined, after evaluation, that he was mentally competent to be tried as a criminal defendant. After being granted the right to represent himself, Zacarias Moussaoui requested that he be allowed to use confidential documents to prepare his case, as well as permission to call detained Al Qaeda members as witnesses. The presiding judge declined to allow him access to the documents, conferring with federal authorities' statement that to do so would create issues of national security, but granted him the right to call Al Qaeda witnesses. The federal government refused to permit these witnesses to testify, a decision which was reversed by a court of appeals.

Zacarias Moussaoui initially pled not guilty to the charges but eventually entered guilty pleas to all charges before the start of the trial. His trial began in 2006. During the course of the trial, FBI agents testified of their awareness of plans to use hijacked aircraft to destroy American buildings. Zacarias Moussaoui also testified, again claiming that he had been involved in a separate conspiracy.

In May of 2006, the jury found Zacarias Moussaoui guilty of the charges against him. During the subsequent sentencing proceedings, jurors were unable to agree on the death penalty due to one dissenting juror. Therefore, Zacarias Moussaoui was sentenced to six consecutive life sentences. He was not made eligible for parole.

After the trial had come to an end, Zacarias Moussaoui waived his right to appeal the sentence. Subsequently, in May of 2006 he filed an appeal in federal court, in which he recanted his plea of guilty and disclaimed involvement in or advance knowledge of the events of September 11. Instead, he now claimed that he had been involved in a separate conspiracy to hijack a commercial aircraft to rescue a fellow jihadist being held in Afghanistan.

However, since he had already waived his right to appeal, his motion was dismissed. 

Cleveland, OH— For 42 year old criminal defense attorney Ian Friedman, the law bug bit him early.

“My mother would tell you I wanted to be a criminal defense lawyer when I was in the fifth grade,” Friedman told laws.com in a recent interview.  “I took a position against the death penalty during a class debate.  Truth be told, I always wanted to be a prosecutor.”  Friedman's love of prosecution was thwarted by a hiring freeze during his time in law school, but this turned out to be fortunate after all.

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

“I took a job in a criminal defense firm,” he explains.  “My research in my first case revealed the government's concealment of evidence.  From that point, I knew my place was as a criminal defense lawyer.”

Today, Friedman says that the greatest challenge to criminal defense attorneys is a lack of respect for the judicial process from people both inside and outside the legal system.  “Our nightly legal commentators treat our trials more like game shows.  Politicians seek advancement by criticizing and whittling away at citizens' constitutional rights,” he laments.

“Finally, the art and practice of real trial lawyering is in peril.  Judges choose expediency over meaningful voir dire, for one example,” Friedman continues.  “I am also disappointed by the lack of creativity I see in the courtroom today.  Too many young lawyers only know what they have seen on Law & Order, and that's a shame.”

While Friedman, like most criminal defense attorneys, started out being unable to do much picking and choosing of cases, the situation has changed now.  “Today, I have the privilege of overseeing a firm of lawyers that practice across the country and overseas,” he says.  “People don't come to us with the easy cases.  They are complex, unpopular, and carry horrid penalties.  I feel that the most difficult and unpopular cases need the best lawyering.”

Friedman believes that he has accomplished his mission to fight for those who most need defending.  “If I were to stop tomorrow, I would be satisfied that I made my mark,” he says.  “I have saved innocent people from lifetimes in prison.  I have taught students at the Cleveland Marshall College of Law how to be good lawyers for years, now.”

In 2005, Friedman was declared  President of the Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and one of his missions was to change the way evidence was provided to defendants in criminal cases. This led him to create the trial strategy called “Ohio Open-Discovery.” Friedman says that the creation of this trial strategy is one of his proudest accomplishments of his career because it eliminated a prosecution tactic of “trial by ambush.” The defendant would be kept in the dark about key evidence and witnesses against them until the moment the witness testified in court. He spearheaded the open discovery movement.

One of his proudest moments occurred on July 1, 2010, the “Ohio Open-Discovery” strategy led to him win a prestigious award from the primary regional bar association. Friedman recalls, “I was seated next to my father.  He said, 'you did good, kid.  What you did will save countless lives after you are long gone.'  I have been asked many times why I did it.  Why did I give so much money, time, and energy?  The answer is simply because it was right.  That is why I do what I do.”

Ian Friedman founded his firm, Friedman & Frey, L.L.C.,  on the belief in the constitutional protection afforded all individuals accused of a crime, and that every citizen deserves nothing less than zealous advocacy by a dedicated lawyer. As a result of years of hard work and dedication to representing their clients, the lawyers of Friedman & Frey, L.L.C., have amassed an extensive number of successful results. To learn more about his practice visit www.iannfriedman.com

Baltimore—Inspiration came early for Charles Curlett, whose legal career has gone on a path from prosecuting war criminals to opening Levin & Curlett, a Maryland and Washington  D.C. litigation boutique.

“When I was in the 8^th grade, I took a week long mini-course in school called 'Mock Murder Trial,'” Curlett recalled in a recent interview with laws.com.  “I was appointed the lead defense counsel.  I think that early taste for courtroom drama stuck with me.  I read every book I could find on criminal trials—from Inherit the Wind to To Kill a Mockingbird.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

For aspiring lawyers, Curlett has career advice.  “Choose your first job wisely.  It is perhaps easier said than done in this difficult job market, but it is important to pursue your passion.  Try to find a job that will allow you to do what you want to do, even if it pays less.”

Curlett's first job in the legal field involved working in the Hague, prosecuting a Bosnian Serb general, Radislav Krstic, for genocide in the former Yugoslavia.  “I worked alongside a former federal prosecutor, Peter McCloskey, who was my first true legal mentor,” he says.  He taught me a great deal about how to investigate and prepare a case.  I learned the importance of thorough preparation, a touchstone of successful lawyering.”

Now working as a defense attorney, Curlett believes that the biggest challenges facing defendants today are “adequate funding for indigent defendants and mandatory minimum sentences.”

In his litigation firm, Curlett is able to provide service to some clients who don't have the means to pay for a lawyer.  “Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan recently commented that indigent defendants don't have the right to a 'Cadillac' lawyer—meaning the best lawyer that money can buy,” he explained.  

“But, she noted, people accused of crimes do deserve at least a 'Ford Taurus' defense.  Because we believe in the constitutional right to an attorney, we devote a portion of our practice to defending people who would not otherwise be able to afford to hire us.  We give them better than a Taurus.”

At Levin & Curlett, better than a Taurus means representation by a firm with highly experienced attorneys, who specialize in defending businesses and individuals.  The firm's attorneys also work to represent whistleblowers in False Claims Act and Qui Tam litigation.

When it comes to working at his own firm, Curlett says he made the right decision.  “I think every lawyer harbors at least a latent desire to hang out the proverbial shingle at some point in his or her career,” he says.  “I have been practicing law for almost 15 years, and finally did so about a year and a half ago.  I am pleased to report that I could not be happier.”

Being your own boss means that you have to pick your team wisely, according to Curlett.  “My law partner—and finding the right one is critically important—is an experienced former federal prosecutor and military judge.  We work hard, enjoy an excellent reputation in our community, and have the freedom to define our practice by taking cases we enjoy and believe in.”

To learn more about Charles Curlett and his practice click here.

Los Angeles, CA—Criminal defense attorney Thomas Mesereau took years to find his calling in the law.  “When I graduated law school, I really didn't know what my long term future would be like,” he recalled in a recent interview with laws.com.  “So I tried various areas of the law.”

After stints at a large international law firm in Washington DC as a civil litigator, a prosecutor's office in Southern California, and at a large oil company subsidiary, Mesereau realized that he simply didn't like much of what he was doing in law.  He transitioned to a small firm and began doing pro bono and criminal defense work.

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

“It was the pro bono and criminal defense work that rang a bell with me,” he says.  “I began to focus more on criminal law and work on pro bono cases, volunteering my time in free legal clinics in South Central Los Angeles and various institutions.”

Aside from Mesereau defending clients in a number of high-profile white collar crime cases, Mesereau has also worked on death penalty cases in Alabama, but the ones he is remembered most for involve celebrities.  Mesereau's defense of Robert Blake in a three-week preliminary hearing garnered him accolades and publicity.  “Going into the preliminary hearing, 80 percent of Court TV viewers thought he was guilty,” he explains.  “Three weeks later, coming out of it, 80 percent of the viewer’s thought he was not guilty.”

Mesereau also defended pop legend Michael Jackson from allegations of child molestation.  “I acquitted pop legend Michael Jackson from ten felonies and of four lesser charges,” he says.  “This case had more media coverage than the O.J. Simpson and Scott Peterson cases combined.  If you recall, on verdict day, Times Square stood still.  In every capital in the world, people stopped what they were doing to find out what the verdict would be—it was an enormous case.”

Dealing with the media can present its own unique challenges and opportunities.  “What you do with the media is very case specific,” Mesereau says.  “In the Robert Blake case, I wanted cameras in the courtroom, but in the Michael Jackson case, I did not want any cameras.  My job is to defend my client, not public relations.”

Media coverage can also influence juries—and not always for the better.  “I think at this point, because there is so much coverage of trials on television, many people walk into courtrooms to serve on the jury thinking they know all about the system,” he explains.  “They actually don't.  They've seen a much distorted image of the system through the entertainment media.  We, as criminal defense attorneys, have to demonstrate that we have integrity, that we are professional, that we are not just slimy and sleazy as we are often portrayed.”

Mesereau says that he takes one death penalty case pro bono in the state of Alabama every year, and intends to continue doing so for as long as he works as a lawyer.  “I do it because it's something I believe in, and something that has given me great lessons,” he says.  “We can't just take any case, so depending on the time a case is brought to our attention, we may or may not have the ability to provide a service to that client.  We are constantly juggling who we are going to represent, and why, and where.

He has received numerous honors and recognitions such as Barbara Walters naming him one of the year’s "Ten Most Fascinating People". He has also been named "Criminal Defense Lawyer of the Year" by the Criminal Courts Bar Association, but what many don’t know is that many African American churches have honored Thomas Mesereau for his contributions for helping the poor in many communities. His zealous work in an out of the courtroom is what sets him apart from many practicing trial attorneys. 

To learn more about his practice visit www.mesereauyu.com