Narcotics Theft from a Pharmacy

I can conceivably see incarceration. I can tell you that there's almost certain to be a pre-sentence investigation after she's found guilty and they'll find out not only that she has two misdemeanor priors but that there was a plea deal to reduce them from felonies. While you would think that these are unrelated priors, the new charge is a double whammy. Not only was she taking and perhaps with intent to sell controlled substances, but she stole them from her employer in a position of trust which indicates that she's not learned anything from her previous sentences.

Of course, you'll have to wait and see before the family law stuff starts to play. While it's possible she might avoid incarceration on this, it's quite possible she will.

So, the 'Initial Appearance' for this case happened today. It is part of a new pilot program. I was surprised that it really wasn't that involved. Basically, both the prosecutor and the public defender went up to the bench and talked with the judge for a few minutes. Next thing I know....another trial scheduled for 10/9.

I've been trying to follow the process as outlined on NH's website:
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/superi...lotProject.pdf

According to the outline the Dispositional Conference is probably what was scheduled. So, my question is 'Could a plea deal been offered today?' If so, does she accept or reject the plea at the next hearing?

Is there anything to deter a defendant from stalling on the plea right up until a trial? My family court hearing happens at the end of October and a lot of the outcome of that is based on this criminal case, so I am trying to figure out if the criminal case will be completed before the family court hearing.

Thanks for your replies. This has been a great resource.

Don't know but the dispositional conference is probably where any plea deal would likely be worked out.

So, tomorrow this case is scheduled for a 'status conference'. From what I gather this is just a "how are things progressing" type of scenerio, correct? Doesn't seem like a lot is accomplished at this. Does it happen in open court? Would there be any discussion about a plea? As you can imagine, I am anxious to learn how this will end....any point in attending or will this just be something for attorneys and the judge like the initial appearance was?

Yeah it's open court. They're typically incredibly boring. Unless there's some outstanding issues with discovery or bills of particulars or something it's likely just to trying to be the defense, prosecution, etc... coming up with a mutually acceptable date for the next hearing or trial.

Plea bargaining doesn't typically happen in the conference itself, though if one has been worked out it the judge will be informed at that point.

You were on point. Very boring and from my perspective a step that simply wasn't needed. I realize that there is a lot of discussion about finding a balance between a speedy system and due process but a 'status conference' seems so wasteful from the outside. As a matter of fact the defendant wasn't even there. It was another 5 minute event between the counsel and the judge in silence and apparently off the record. Why?

NH has adopted an 'Initial Appearance' pilot program that they claim:

Quote:

---

"The Initial Appearance Pilot Project implements a new model for processing felony charges and misdemeanor or lesser charges related to those felonies in the superior court. The goal is to promote the prompt and fair resolution of cases through early information sharing and early judicial attention to the case resolution process."

---

My argument is that why schedule a date for a status conference? Shouldn't counsel be communicating by default? Why not just have counsel hand something into the court by a certain date? I don't know how much money was spent on this 5 minute court session but it did not seem productive. Now, yet another court date will be scheduled. Today seemed like it was essentially a 'water cooler session' with everyone asking "So, how are things going - ya good? Hey judge, how are the kids? New robes? Sweet!"

I understand that this must protect 'due process" in some way but this is an open and shut case. Video footage of the thefts of over 250 narcotics, grand jury indictment, confession to employer on record, and prior thefts within a few months. It seems like some cases can certainly go on a much faster tract to save tax dollars and such.

I understand there is a reason for the way things are done, but I am having a hard time seeing what they are in this instance. In a perfect world I would think after the indictment and arraignment process.....there should be a plea/sentencing hearing. If the plea is innocent, goto a trial and be done with it. If a plea deal has been arranged, take it at plea and sentencing. Next case....

Why so many steps? Perhaps if this was a more complicated case I could understand better. If there was questionable evidence.....but this really doesn't seem complicated to me.

Granted, I am emotionally invested in the outcome as it will affect my custody case.

Some cases have more involved statuses. I've been involved with 14-distinct count computer security cases where there are a lot of issues to hammer out. Mostly, I think the judge wants to hear from both sides at the same time. The judge is GOD when it comes to the scheduling of the parties and it's done for his convenience.

Thanks. I can understand what you are saying. Judges do have the ultimate power and schedule things how they like. I guess what confuses me is that 'hearing from both sides' is what I thought an actual trial is for. It seems all these court dates involving just the judge and counsel negates the whole reason to have a trial in the first place. When and if a trial happens it would seem that the counsel and judge have already discussed the direction it will go. There certainly is a lot of steps in a criminal court case.

It is probably unreasonable to expect the attorney to simply hand something over to the judge, and moreso as part of a criminal case. Unfortunately that doesn't help you at all. Truth be told, this could go on ... for long time to come. All we can do really is commiserate with you a bit, and stand by while you have to sit and wait for something (or nothing) to happen.

It is complicated by several things though - and I do not believe it's as much of a slam-dunk as it may seem.

The wheels turn slowly.

I realize there is so much speculation and 'details' in cases. In your opinion, if this was going to plea out to something like a 'slap on the wrist' would it have done so by this point? Does this seem like we are headed toward an actual trial? If this is the case....yeah....I'm looking at a very long road here.