Adam and Bill are charged with kidnapping and appear before…
Questions
Adаm аnd Bill аre charged with kidnapping and appear befоre a magistrate tо answer fоr the charges. Adam’s family has retained private counsel for Adam. Bill on the other hand has no family or funds to retain private counsel. The magistrate is new to the position and expresses reluctance to appoint counsel for Bill based on both the heinousness of the charges and limited taxpayer resources. Bill insists that he is “broke” and demands the court appoints counsel. The court asks Bill if he is aware of any authority requiring that he receive free appointed counsel. Bill shrugs and insists he heard it somewhere. The magistrate declines to appoint Bill counsel and asserts that they will revisit the issue at the next hearing in 30 days. At the next hearing the magistrate appoints the public defender to represent Bill. The case progresses slowly and neither Adam nor bill are satisfied with how their Attorneys are handling their cases. At the next court hearing on the case, Adam tells the court he no longer wants his current attorney and request to retain new and “better” counsel, to wit: his (Adam’s) cousin who recently passed the bar. The court denies his request, asserting that Adam’s current counsel is more experienced and is already well familiar with the case. Moreover, the trial date is fast approaching. Bill also addresses the court asserting that he wants to represent himself since his public defender, while nice enough, is just too busy. The court questions Bill regarding his knowledge of criminal procedure and the rules of evidence. The court feeling that while Bill is of sound mind, he does not possess sufficient legal knowledge to represent himself adequately and may therefore do himself harm. The court denies Bill’s request to represent himself. Adam and Bill, who have not posted bail, are then returned to their jail cells. Upon Adam’s return, deputies move Adam from his old jail cell and cell mate, and into a new jail cell with a new jail cell mate. Unbeknownst to Adam, his new cell mate has been cooperating with the jail deputies and is wearing a recording device. The cooperating cell mate was instructed to not ask Adam questions about his case, but merely to listen to Adam. Adam in his frustration with the court, begins venting about the court process. The cooperating cellmate, too eager to earn leniency in his own case, commences asking Adam questions about his case and whether he expects to prevail. Adam then answers the cell mate’s questions and makes incriminating statements about his case. Adam and Bill’s cases proceed to trial. Adam’s statements to the cooperating cell mate were admitted into evidence. Adam’s attorney never objected to their admission. Bill’s public defender saw there was not much she could do considering the overwhelming evidence against Bill. Therefore, over Bill’s objection, she declined to pursue avenues of investigation that she felt were futile and instead attempted to convince the jury that Bill was acting under the duress and undue influence of Adam who was the mastermind of the crimes. Both Adam and Bill were convicted of all charges. Adam and Bill filed timely appeals. Adam asserts that the court erred (1) allowing his statements to the cooperating cell mate to be used against him; (2) in refusing to his request to retain his cousin; and (3) asserts ineffective assistance of counsel Bill asserts that the court erred in (1) refusing to appoint counsel at his initial appearance of the charges; (2) in denying his request to represent himself; and (3) asserts ineffective assistance of counsel. Directions: Pursuant to 6th Amendment Jurisprudence discussed the appellate issues asserted by both Adam and Bill, and the likely rulings by the Court of Appeals.
A 68-yeаr-оld pаtient presents with а brоwn, waxy plaque оn the trunk that appears “stuck on” to the skin surface. Which diagnosis is most likely?