For the Defense - Vol. 5, Issue 2 - 29

* At the Rule 600 hearing, after the defense has
made a prima facie showing that the defendant
hasthe
notDisciplinary
been brought
to trial
365attorney
days,
Board.
An within
emeritus
may
therenew
Commonwealth
burden
of between
proving
the status bears
on anthe
annual
basis
January
1 and
January 31
of each
and has a
that
they have
nonetheless
acted
withyear
diligence.
CLE
requirement
8 credits:
substantive
and 2
This
means
that afterofthe
defense6has
made such
ethics.facie showing, it is the Commonwealth
a prima
who should be required to put on its evidence
In conclusion,
thereonly
many
ways
to leave
and the
defense should
argue
after
the the
stage of lawyering,
andso.
asEssentially,
with so much
in 600
our
Commonwealth
has done
a Rule
professional
lives,
preparation
and
planning
hearing should proceed in form almost identicallyare
the keys to success. And just like in your solo
to a suppression hearing. If the judge asks you
practice, there are resources and help available to
to argue prior to the Commonwealth's evidence,
you - you don't have to go it alone.
make it clear that you could not possibly argue
onNOTES:
behalf of your client until you know what the
Commonwealth's evidence of diligence is.
PANTONE

2955C

7406C

CMYK

90/78/39/30

9/22/91/0

RGB

22/58/92

234/194/56

HEXIDECIMAL

#153A5B

#EAC137

Planningappears
- Is It Mandatory
* If theSuccession
Commonwealth
at the Rule 600
for Pennsylvania Lawyers? http://www.
hearing
and does not present any evidence that
padisciplinaryboard.org/news-media/news-article/68/
it acted
with
diligence-for instance, they did not
succession-planning---is-it-mandatory-for-lawyers-inbring
in the officer
to testify
to theBoard
attempts
made
pennsylvania.
Former
Disciplinary
Chair,
Dion G.
wrote thisthe
informative
article, posted
to Rassias,
find andEsq.
apprehend
defendant-argue
thaton
thehave
Board's
explaining
the impetus
this
they
notwebsite,
met their
burden because
the for
burden
question
and
surveying
other
states'
requirements.
of proof includes the burden of production and
2
Opinion
(Dec.
arguments
of 2014-100
counsel are
not 2015).
evidence.
3
See Pa.R.D.E. §§321-329.
1

full notes section for this article.

Aboutthe
theAuthor
Author
About
Ellen Brotman is the owner
and founder
Law,
Katherine
ErnstofisBrotman
an
specializing in white collar
appellate
attorney
with
the
criminal
defense,
professional
Montgomery
County
Public
ethics, and
appellate
advocacy.
Ms. Brotman,
a
Defender's
Office.
She
former
Assistant
Federal
handles
appeals
from
all
Defender with over 25 years of
units,experience
juvenile to
homicide,
litigating in federal
and she
also
court,
hasformulates
defended all types
of white collar matters
including
public
corruption,
legal
strategy
for pre-trial
fraud,
mail
fraud, wire
fraud andMagna
securities
fraud.
andtax
trial
units.
Katherine
graduated
Cum
Ms. Brotman writes and speaks frequently on criminal
Laude from Loyola Law School, New Orleans
defense, compliance, and ethics issues. Before moving
in 2007
and was on
law
review.clerked
She practiced
to Philadelphia,
Ms.
Brotman
for Judge Lee P.
at Kaufman,
Coren
&
Ress
in
Philadelphia
outof New
Gagliardi in the U.S. District Court of the S.D.
York.
She is admitted
in Pennsylvania
of law
school,
and thereafter
did workand
in New
the York.

intersection of horseracing law and §1983 for a
number of years before following her passion
for indigent criminal defense.

Share this article
Vol. 4, Issue 4

l

For The Defense

9

Vol. 5, Issue 2 l For The Defense

29
http://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/news-media/news-article/68/succession-planning---is-it-mandatory-for-lawyers-in-pennsylvania http://www.smartstartinc.com/pennsylvania
For the Defense - Vol. 5, Issue 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of For the Defense - Vol. 5, Issue 2
