Scott Key & Associates
  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Embedded Counsel
    • Appeals
    • Trial Litigation
  • Meet The Team
    • Scott Key
    • Kayci Timmons
    • Tori Bradley
    • Sam Kuperberg
  • Resources
    • Blogs
    • Podcasts
    • Upload Consultation Documents
    • FAQs
  • Contact
  • Call 678-610-6624
  • Menu Menu

My Talk at the State Bar General Counsel’s Office on the Georgia Appeals Process

November 19, 2010/by J. Scott Key

Yesterday, I was honored to be the guest of the State Bar of Georgia General Counsel’s office for their in-office CLE. The Office of the General Counsel is the group at the State Bar of Georgia who, among other things, that deals with bar complaints and attorney discipline.

I was one of two speakers for this group yesterday. I was there to provide an overview of how criminal appeals work in the State of Georgia from conviction to direct appeal and to the State habeas process. The other speaker was Brian Mendelsohn, with the Federal Defender Program for the Northern District of Georgia. Brian talked about the Federal process.

Brian was great. The audience was great. Brian and I both got off of our prepared remarks and truly dialogued around the conference table.

It turns out that all Federal appeals have the same key events in the life of a case where the attorney-client relationship can go sour. State appeals in Georgia have their own key moments. In the Federal system, it all boils down to whether to take on an appeal waiver as part of a plea agreement or to plea without such a waiver. Conflicts also center around choosing when to object to information contained in a pre-sentence report.

In the State system, the three main areas where the attorney and client may find themselves at odds with one another include which issues to raise on appeal (particularly whether to assert an ineffective assistance of counsel claim), delays in getting the transcript from the court reporter, and the client’s desire to get his own copy of the transcript so that he can “help” with the appeal.

Beyond these key substantive things, there was one common theme that resounded in our presentation and our discussion with the group: communication is key. Even if the choice of issues is ultimately yours, it is important to explain as much as you can why you are doing what you are doing.

Even if communication involves relaying information that is not particularly earth shattering, it is important to communicate. For instance, “I don’t have the transcript yet” is news though it feels like it isn’t news. Making the client understand the process and the progress of his case is important even if the process is at a stand-still and there has been no progress.

So, thanks Brian and thanks State Bar General Counsel’s Office for the opportunity to share our thoughts on the criminal appeals process in the Federal and Georgia State system and how best to serve the clients who find themselves within that process.

Tags: Appeals Process, Brian Mendelsohn, Communication with Client, State Bar of Georgia Office of General Counsel
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on X
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
0 0 J. Scott Key /wp-content/uploads/SK-Logo-Black-White.png J. Scott Key2010-11-19 15:10:102010-11-19 15:10:10My Talk at the State Bar General Counsel’s Office on the Georgia Appeals Process
You might also like
Uniform Rule on Electronic Court Filing: A Step in the Right Direction For Georgia
Grand Jury Investigation Questions Georgia Court Reporter Fees
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Related Resources

  • Living a Fulfilling Life (as a Lawyer)
  • Originalist Textualism 101 for Practitioners with Keith Blackwell
  • What I’ve Read, Heard, And Am Pondering This Week: June 1
  • Textualism As An Advocacy Tool
  • What I’ve Read, Heard, And Am Pondering This Week: March 7
  • Embracing the Legal Fundamentals with William Maselli

Archives

  • October 2024
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • October 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • July 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010

ADDRESS

199 W Jefferson St.
Madison, GA 30650

PHONE

678-610-6624

EMAIL

tori@scottkeylaw.com
© Scott Key & Associates, all rights reserved. | Website by Madison Studios  
  • LinkedIn
  • Youtube
Georgia Supreme Court Runoff: Weighing Philosophy Against QualificationsGeorgia Supreme Court Establishes Constitutional Right to Interpreter
Scroll to top