BishopAccountability.org
	Prosecutor and Defense Lawyer Discuss Warren Jeffs Case, Appeal By Brenda Sapino Jeffreys and John Council Texas Lawyer August 12, 2011 http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/PubArticleTX.jsp?id=1202511025383&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1 Eric J.R. Nichols, of counsel with Beck, Redden & Secrest in Austin A lawyer who prosecuted Warren Jeffs says the polygamist religious leader got a fair trial even though Jeffs shed his team of lawyers during trial and chose to represent himself. However, Eric J.R. Nichols, of counsel with Beck, Redden & Secrest in Austin who was a prosecutor for the Texas Office of the Attorney General (OAG) in the Jeffs case, says he expects Jeffs to appeal his conviction. "We feel very comfortable and very confident that he received a fair trial and the judge in the case went to great lengths to ensure that the trial was conducted in accordance with applicable law," says Nichols. On Aug. 9, a Tom Green County jury sentenced Jeffs to life in prison for the aggravated sexual assault of a 12-year-old child, and sentenced him to 20 years in prison for sexual assault of a 15-year-old child. He will serve the sentences consecutively. A jury convicted Jeffs, leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, of those charges on Aug. 4. On July 27, Jeffs fired all of his lawyers before testimony in his trial began. He represented himself and sat silent during the evidentiary portion of the case. Nichols says 51st District Judge Barbara Walther advised Jeffs of his appellate rights after his sentencing. Nichols says his role in the Jeffs prosecution dates back to June 2008, when he was deputized as an assistant prosecuting attorney for the 51st District, which is handling the prosecution with the AG's office. At that time, Nichols was deputy attorney general for criminal justice for the OAG, but he maintained his prosecutorial role in the Jeffs case once he rejoined Beck, Redden in March after a four-year stint with the AG's office. Nichols says he and Beck, Redden partner Fields Alexander of Houston, also a special prosecutor for the Jeffs case, worked 18-hour days for the past three weeks while the case was in trial. They did the work pro bono. Nichols says he and Alexander spent hundreds of hours over the past months on the prosecution. Nichols, a former federal prosecutor, says the judge "went through a long process" to ensure Jeffs understood the consequences of deciding to represent himself during trial. It didn't necessarily make the prosecution's job easier, he says. "When you have a high caliber of criminal-defense attorneys who were of record in representing him, you are gearing yourself up for a real challenge, a real test between professionals," he says. "We definitely tried the case the same way had a defense attorney been present; we laid the foundation for evidence, we examined witnesses in exactly the same way had a defense lawyer been present," he says. Robert Udashen, who was a member of Jeffs' seven-lawyer defense team before Jeffs dismissed his counsel, says his former client's chances on appeal aren't hopeless. In an interview before Jeffs' sentencing, Udashen says he was hired for Jeffs' legal team six months ago to file a motion to suppress challenging the search warrant the Texas Rangers served at the YFZ Ranch in Eldorado, where church members, led by Jeffs, lived. In the motion, Udashen says he alleged that the search warrant served on the ranch was based on a "hoax" phone call made to law enforcement officials — a motion Udashen was nearly finished arguing in court before Jeffs fired him. "Almost everything was done," says Udashen, a partner in Dallas' Sorrels, Udashen & Anton. "The judge went ahead and denied the motion to suppress. I still think the issues for the most part are preserved for appeal." Udashen says he was not surprised when Jeffs announced he was firing his legal team. "He had real strong ideas about a religious defense he wanted to present. And he didn't feel that any of the attorneys understood . . .," Udashen says. "It's difficult to represent yourself. I think he's been able to set forth the religious testimony that he wanted. So he got what he wanted. But it clearly wasn't successful — the jury found him guilty anyway," Udashen says. "There's not really a religious defense in the law to sexually assaulting a child. And we wanted to defend him on a more traditional basis, which he didn't want."
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.