Recieved a subpoena to be a witness

[Ohiogal]

OG, I normally agree with you, but your last two posts seem to be nothing but unfair scare tactics. So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and ask what your basis is for implying that a student has some (legal) duty to report statements of another's crime or face criminal sanctions of their own?


PS: I just killed the last Snickers bar in my office. Now you have to report it.

Maybe I should have said COULD face being an accessory after the fact. And notice I said "crime" and not school misconduct or something.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Actually, I'd think it more likely he could be held accountable in school rather than criminally. If "friend" tells OP, "Hey, I just robbed a bank" and OP doesn't tell the police, do you know of any DA who will charge OP with accessory after the fact? (I sure don't).

Every person who, after a felony has been committed, harbors,
conceals or aids a principal in such felony, with the intent that
said principal may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction or
punishment, having knowledge that said principal has committed such
felony or has been charged with such felony or convicted thereof, is
an accessory to such felony.

In this scenario, where did OP commit, harbor, (affirmatively) conceal or aid the defendant? And even if you go with the 'conceal' angle, where's the requisite intent? And where's the "knowledge" that the defendant's confession was actually true?

I can appreciate what you are trying to do, I just don't want anyone to get a false impression as to what the law says.

 

[CdwJava]

It all depends on the details. Since we don't know what crime is being prosecuted, and we don't know the extent of the OP's involvement, it's impossible to say WHAT would come to pass.

In CA merely refusing to reveal the existance of a felony is not sufficient to be charged as an accessory. However, if the party "affirmatively misrepresents" the details of the offense, THEN the person can be charged.

- Carl

 

[You Are Guilty]

In CA merely refusing to reveal the existance of a felony is not sufficient to be charged as an accessory. However, if the party "affirmatively misrepresents" the details of the offense, THEN the person can be charged.

Oh, no argument that they can be charged under those circumstances - that falls under the "conceal" part of the statute (although I'd wager most ADAs have better things to do than charge liars in small beans cases). Problem here is that is not what the OP posted - he doesn't remember anything, so isn't affirmatively doing anything.

And just to be extra clear, he can't be held in criminal contempt for failing to comply with a subpoena which was not properly served. (It appears that his was not, but I am not ready to conclude that for certain until speaking to his parents ).

 

[CdwJava]

Oh, no argument that they can be charged under those circumstances - that falls under the "conceal" part of the statute (although I'd wager most ADAs have better things to do than charge liars in small beans cases). Problem here is that is not what the OP posted - he doesn't remember anything, so isn't affirmatively doing anything.

And just to be extra clear, he can't be held in criminal contempt for failing to comply with a subpoena which was not properly served. (It appears that his was not, but I am not ready to conclude that for certain until speaking to his parents ).

I agree that good service does not appear to have been made.

And with regard to the accessory statute, it is only applicable for concealing felonies - "small beans" cases are not usually felonies. And, yes, we do prosecute those when the lie can be proven ... usually, though, the liar backtracks and comes out with the truth so it's not necessary to prosecute.

If the DA wants the witness, he can re-serve the child. But, as I previously said, he had best confirm the issue because while he may not have been properly served, he just MIGHT end up being hooked for contempt until the matter is sorted out. (And, for the record, I don't buy the lack of recall claim ... if I had a nickel for every time I heard that ...)

Better to be a truthful witness than to skulk in the shadows ... as I said, he may one day be a victim himself - hopefully his witnesses will stand up and do the right thing rather than try to find a way not to get involved.

- Carl

 

[spiritd]

You guys are taking this way too seriously. It was a matter with him saying something to my English teacher which happened freshman year (last year) I heard about what happened 3 months ago along with the rest of the football team, so I barely know details and I can't testify based on what the defendant claims, as he changes the story about everyday. My dad called the lawyer today and said I can't make it since I have no ride (honest) and the lawyer was supposed to call my dad back. He didn't. If the lawyer isn't up to the task of handling the case and the witnesses properly, then that's his fault.

Also, they can't just arrest me like that. If they fine me, we are prepared.

 

[CdwJava]

Also, they can't just arrest me like that. If they fine me, we are prepared.

If you were properly served, YES they COULD arrest you. I've been there and done that ... I've even been ordered by a judge to go pick up the miscreants from school and bring them to court.

Since you mention that your dad called a lawyer, I presume that it is is the defense that has called you. In that case, he will have to make his own arrangements for you and he will likely have to re-serve you if he wants you there. But! If there had been good service, it would be the responsibility of you and your parents to get to court - the "I didn't have a ride" defense would only work if you were over 50 miles away. I imagine your town has busses and cabs, and that you and your family know people with cars.

But, since the service appears to be inadequate, then there should be little to worry about.

- Carl

 

[spiritd]

If you were properly served, YES they COULD arrest you. I've been there and done that ... I've even been ordered by a judge to go pick up the miscreants from school and bring them to court.

Since you mention that your dad called a lawyer, I presume that it is is the defense that has called you. In that case, he will have to make his own arrangements for you and he will likely have to re-serve you if he wants you there. But! If there had been good service, it would be the responsibility of you and your parents to get to court - the "I didn't have a ride" defense would only work if you were over 50 miles away. I imagine your town has busses and cabs, and that you and your family know people with cars.

But, since the service appears to be inadequate, then there should be little to worry about.

- Carl

Yes, this is the defense that I'm talking about. My dad called the lawyer that issued the subpoena. It said on the form that you must call to make other arrangements, and my dad did and they didn't reply so I'm assuming it's the defense's responsibility. The court is about 20 miles away so no 50 :[ Ok good. By the way, what are the chances of them issuing an arrest warrant? Wouldn't they be more likely to send a warning/a fine prior to arresting me? I only received the subpoena 2-3 days ago and the case is Tuesday so I doubt that's ample time for a judge to really feel they should arrest me (I'm a good kid). Thank you for your help, perhaps I may be able to join my 3 day weekend now?

 

[CdwJava]

Well, if the defense attorney presents the court with the method of service (in your mailbox) then no arrest warrant would issue.

When they do deal with these, they rarely send a note or issue a fine, they issue a warrant and make you appear. I have had to haul even VICTIMS into court on contempt warrants before. But, in this case, I'd say the chances are slim to none that you will be arrested. if your testimony was deemed crucial, and the defense made a stink, it's possible they could continue the hearing for a few days in order to get you properly served (which should include your parents as well).

Enjoy the weekend - no one is likely to come and get you next week. Just be prepared to actually make the arrangements to go at some point. You do NOT have the legal right to ignore the subpoena or decline to go.

- Carl

 

[abercrombie]

Served on short notice: Must I appear?

Georgia

I have a similar question. I was served a subpoena to appear to give a deposition at an attorney's office in a matter where a party is sueing a corporation I worked for 2 years ago. I don't mind giving a deposition but I was served 3 days in advance and have a non-refundable plane ticket and will be out of town. The attorney had called me two days ago and asked me to give a statement. I said that was fine but I would be out of town this week but he's ignored that. There's a check made out to me for a small amount attached.

This seems unreasonable - must I appear and cancel my plans? Can I simply send him an overnight letter that I am unavailable on that date and suggest an alternative?
I'm guessing that if I hint that

 

[las365]

You need to start your own thread for your question, please.