Kentucky Lawyer

Amicus curiae

3 Mac Swinford of the outstanding criminal lawyers of this state. He was generally recognized for his ability as a trial lawyer and had had wide and varied eperience. There was associated with him at the time an able young lawyer, Mr. George Boston. I appointed Mr. Myers and Mr. Boston to defend the bank robber. Two days were consumed in the trial. No accused ever received a more skillful and thorough defense, but the evidence for the government was overwhelming. The defendant was found guilty by the jury and sentenced to twenty-five years in the penitentiary. Wishing to ehaust all efforts in behalf of their client, the attorneys appealed the case, wrote briefs, appeared before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sith Circuit at Cincinnati and argued their client’s cause. Cincinnati is more than two hundred and fifty miles from Bowling Green, and the trip required an overnight stay. The attorneys paid their own epenses which, in this instance, it can be seen were quite an item. Amicus curiae One of the best accounts of an attorney’s unselfish service to an indigent defendant comes from Honorable H. Church Ford, United States Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Judge Ford was a Kentucky circuit judge before his appointment to the federal bench in 193 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. While on the state bench and when holding a term of court at Frankfort, the judge had appear before him a man from the Craw section of the city of Frankfort. The 33 Kentucky Lawyer charge was wilful murder. Craw was a slum section of our capital city where many of the families of prisoners confined in the state penitentiary had moved from other parts of the state in order to be “near their man.” A cursory eamination of the indictment and inquiry into the surrounding facts of the homicide disclosed to Judge Ford that the defendant was in very serious trouble. He was not a resident of Frankfort or even of Kentucky but was a West Virginian who had followed a family from eastern Kentucky to Frankfort and was in town only temporarily . The altercation out of which the killing occurred seemed to have been of his own making for the sole purpose of disposing of an adversary in a romance triangle. The defendant, without money or friends, appeared before the court for arraignment and entered a plea of not guilty. He, of course, neither had a lawyer nor knew any of the members of the Frankfort bar, so he requested that an attorney be appointed to defend him. Judge Ford, with some knowledge of the charges and type of evidence that the Commonwealth would very likely offer, was afraid the jury might give the defendant the etreme penalty of death in the electric chair. For that reason, he felt that he should call upon an attorney of ability and long eperience in trial work. One of the leaders of the Kentucky bar, a man of large practice in civil as well as criminal cases, and a very busy lawyer, was Mr. Leslie Morris of Frankfort. Judge Ford knew what a sacrifice it would be for Mr. Morris to assume the defense in this criminal case—the effort and aniety it would place upon his shoulders and the altogether possible disastrous outcome. He felt, however, 3 Mac Swinford that the precarious position of the defendant called for etreme measures and thereupon asked Mr. Morris if he would accept the appointment as counsel for this friendless man. The distinguished attorney arose magnificently to the occasion and, representative of the finest traditions of our profession, assured the judge that he would serve his client and the court to the best of his ability. The first thing he did was to move for a continuance in order to give himself time to make adequate preparation for the trial. The motion was granted. Mr. Morris postponed his other business, went into the case carefully, took a trip to West Virginia at his own epense, and did whatever was otherwise required, irrespective of cost to himself in money and time. He conducted the defense at the trial as the earnest, skillful advocate that he was. There were numerous witnesses and the Commonwealth , represented by an able prosecutor, presented an almost perfect case of wilful, premeditated murder. Les...