I wouldn't feel so bad - but am trying an unrepresented defendant for DWI next week. He has approached a local attorney, who started sniffing around the case. The attorney backed off quickly when the judge told said attorney's secretary that absolutely NO plea offers would be accepted; that the case WOULD be tried.

Now, if counsel has adequate warning that this is the court's stance, and we can't come to a meeting of the minds by the time the letters go out to the jury pool, so be it. But this kid is going forward with no assistance - and now if he GETS assistance, the attorney's hands are tied.

This seems a little overbearing on the part of the court to me - after all, we are talking a 1st offense DWI BTR, no accident, no aggrevation.

Any thoughts or advice? I have a very bad feeling about this one.

Did the judge just take a dislike to the defendant or is it a new policy?

The judge has had at least one conference with the defendant - without me - concerning the case. I suspect it is not so much a problem with the defendant as with the rest of us.

Seems to me the judge is within his authority to say that he will not accept a plea bargain on the eve of trial, but he can't stop the defendant from entering a plea if he wants to. If the defendant pleads guity and elects to go to the court for punishment, then the only thing the judge has done is let him know that he won't have the opportunity to withdraw his plea if the judge doesn't like your recommendation.