For the Defense - Vol. 6 Issue 3 - 11

time and litigate it prior to any trial to preserve an
objection to the additional time period.
* At the Rule 600 hearing, after the defense has
made a prima facie showing that the defendant
has not been brought to trial within 365 days,
the Commonwealth bears the burden of proving
that they have nonetheless acted with diligence.
This means that after the defense has made such
a prima facie showing, it is the Commonwealth
who should be required to put on its evidence
and the defense should only argue after the
Commonwealth has done so. Essentially, a Rule 600
hearing should proceed in form almost identically
to a suppression hearing. If the judge asks you
to argue prior to the Commonwealth's evidence,
make it clear that you could not possibly argue
on behalf of your client until you know what the
Commonwealth's evidence of diligence is.
computers in a café or a library, make sure you
have anti-malware running on your computer
before you use the drive.
9. Backup your data frequently and use a data
backup solution that is disconnected from your
network, to eliminate the risk of the backup
being compromised in an attack that spreads
throughout your network. In the event you
become a victim of ransomware, your segregated
backup will be the basis for rebuilding your
systems.
10. One of the most frequent entry points
for hackers is a " Remote Desktop Protocol "
or " Remote Desktop Gateway, " found on all
Windows computers. These entry points can be
easily disabled. For guidance on how to do this,
go to this link.
About the Author
Click here to view and/or print the
full notes section for this article.
About the Author
* If the Commonwealth appears at the Rule 600
hearing and does not present any evidence that
it acted with diligence-for instance, they did not
bring in the officer to testify to the attempts made
to find and apprehend the defendant-argue that
they have not met their burden because the burden
of proof includes the burden of production and
arguments of counsel are not evidence.
11. Investigate cyber-insurance. Depending
on the level of risk and the volume of personal,
sensitive information you have, such a policy can
be affordable and insure against both business
interruption and the payment of ransom. The
insurable losses from a breach can vary greatly,
so be sure to carefully check that you are covered
for any actual theft, extortion fees, replacement
of computer equipment, forensic recovery, and
any ensuing lawsuits. Your dialogue with a carrier
can provide an opportunity to identify both risk
factors and mitigation strategies that can make
the insurance more affordable and provide better
protection.
As criminal defense attorneys, we have become adept
at managing the lurking dangers in our clients' cases. But
just as we endeavor through hard work, determination,
and creativity to protect our clients' rights, we must
also protect our clients' confidences that reside in our
computers. And, in doing so, we will also protect ourselves
and our professional reputations.
PANTONE
2955C
CMYK
7406C
90/78/39/30
RGB
9/22/91/0
NOTES:
1
22/58/92
234/194/56
HEXIDECIMAL
#153A5B
#EAC137
See Hiscox Insurance v. Warden Grier, 474 F. Supp. 3d 1004
(2020) (Breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and
malpractice claims survive motion to dismiss where law firm
failed notify clients of a major data breach in the course of which
client confidential information was held for ransom.).
and trial units. Katherine graduated Magna Cum
Laude from Loyola Law School, New Orleans
in 2007 and was on law review. She practiced
at Kaufman, Coren & Ress in Philadelphia out
of law school, and thereafter did work in the
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
columns: the Professional Conduct column for The Legal
Intelligencer and For The Defense, a digital journal
published by the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers. Ms. Brotman regularly present ethics
training for the American Bar Association, (White
Collar Crime Committee and Center for Professional
responsibility), the National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers, the Pennsylvania Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, the Pennsylvania Bar Institute,
and other county bar associations.
Katherine Ernst is an
appellate attorney with the
Montgomery County Public
Defender's Office. She
handles appeals from all
units, juvenile to homicide,
and she also formulates
legal strategy for pre-trial
For over 25 years, Ellen C.
Brotman has concentrated
in the areas of professional
responsibility, ethics and
compliance counseling, and
criminal defense. She is a
frequent presenter and author
on ethics issues in local and
national venues and authors
two regularly published
Vol. 6, Issue 3 l For The Defense 11
https://www.lifewire.com/disable-windows-remote-desktop-153337 http://www.mbklaw.com
For the Defense - Vol. 6 Issue 3

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of For the Defense - Vol. 6 Issue 3
