forgotten favorites x 2
by: Ryan • December 6, 2012 • no comments
Has anyone litigated this yet? Gabe's Gabe's post here -- originally posted in 2011 -- is utterly convincing.
And given that UUV and PSV now merge, thanks to State v. Noe, it's often a good idea to take these to trial, just to preserve the suspension issue. Presumably, it would have to be a lifetime suspension to avoid the Gatekeeper of Moot at the COA, but still, very much worth it more times than not.
This is another example of why defense lawyers need to think about merger before trial, not just before sentencing. If you know your client will only end up with one conviction anyway, you've eliminated one of the strongest disincentives to going to trial: that the defendant would end up with more charges.
One of these days I'll do a list of all the advantages of merger, since it is a fairly boring and confusing topic. Stil, it's one of those things that if you fully understand, your clients will be better off in subtle and not-so-subtle ways.
