Tyler TX Facebook

Follow Donny on Twitter

Username:
Password:
  Remember Me   Forgot password?  Register
0-9  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

Find or Refer a Contractor in Tyler

In the Matter of Joel D. Mallory, Jr., a Texas Attorney. . . the Rest of the Story

July 9th, 2012

This responds to the series of articles that have been published by the Tyler Telegraph Newspaper, the most recent of which was published on June 27, 2012 regarding Attorney Joel Mallory, Jr. It has become necessary for a public response to be made to the allegations. These comments are not to be interpreted as an all inclusive reply to all matters in controversy. I reserve the right to make subsequent changes or clarifications as necessary. I do not waive any legal rights.

Recently, the Tyler Telegraph published a poorly constructed article under the headline that “Lawyer who Lied to Judge Failed to Appear in Court ” for a June 16, 2012 hearing. As the Tyler Telegraph failed to contact me personally, this missive is prepared as an attempt to mitigate the harm your form of “journalism” has caused to me and my family. My character and professional reputation has been shattered.

The allegations made against me arise from my representation of Corey Webb, an African-American juvenile who was charged with aggravated assault in a particularly notorious case, State v. Corey Webb, Cause No. 07-1350-10, 7th District Court of Smith County Texas. My legal representation started on September 16, 2011. A few weeks prior to initiating my representation, Corey Webb had entered a guilty plea. Judge Kerry Russell was the presiding judge. This case concluded at the trial level with Mr. Corey Webb being assessed a term of 50 years incarceration.
Mr. Matt Bingham is the Smith County District Attorney. The Prosecutor responsible for the Webb matter was Mr. Richard Vance – a young and relatively inexperienced attorney who has been licensed for a total of 7 years. Mr. Vance launched the investigative search against me and my family because “the case had been subject to numerous resets” and his feeling that granting the motion to withdraw plea that I intended to file “would undermine the criminal justice system.” Based on his observations, he also believed that, when I made my initial appearance on September 16, 2011, I did not appear remorseful enough in my discussions with Judge Russell concerning my mother’s death. This investigative search was launched Immediately following my initial appearance. The allegations made against me all arise from that search. Ultimately, in addition to the death of my mother, I had to deal with unsubstantiated accusations that I lied about the circumstances of my mother’s
death.

This search was intensive, Orwellian, and abusive. The prosecutor’s office used a proprietary law enforcement software to identify my family members and obtained highly personal information pertaining to each. Personal information was also compiled in the format of a “Mallory family tree.” The authority of the Smith County District Attorney’s Office was illegally used to obtain highly sensitive information such as birth certificates, death records, drivers licenses, and HIPPIA records.

Interestingly, Mr. Vance, during his cross examination under oath, denied conducting investigations of other lawyers. However, it was subsequently discovered that an investigation was indeed conducted of my attorney, Rosalind Kelly. In this regard, I am aware that records were obtained, at the very least, from the State Bar of Texas. Because of my concerns for her, I requested for her to tender a Motion to Withdraw.

To set matters straight, I never lied to gain any continuance. My initial involvement for the underlying case was to observe the sentencing of Mr. Webb on September 16, 2011. I was not the attorney of record at that time. I advised the Court that I intended to handle post trial and appellate matters. Judge Kerry Russell expressed he did not feel it would be fair for me to “remain on the sidelines while all of this is going on.” This case was continued because Judge Russell decided to pass on sentencing in order to take up some of the legal issues I intended to raise. If Corey Webb was sentenced, he would have been entitled to raise the same matters through a motion for new trial or by appeal. As an attorney, I am duly required to raise all matters which may have an impact on my representation. Upon information and belief, I told Judge Russell that my mother passed and made him aware of my travel plans. Any statement made to Judge Russell about my mother’s death was
based on my understanding of the information that I received around that time. I understood Judge Russell’s queries as relating to my travel plans. How this is material is questionable because my mother did in fact pass. He told me it was not necessary to provide further information. It was not a lie nor does it constitute a statement that was made with the knowledge or intention that it is false. There was no motivation for me to lie because Judge Russell sua sponte (on his own accord) decided to pass on sentencing matters.

Nevertheless, Mr. Vance took the highly sensitive and personal information and attached it to a Motion to Determine Truthfulness of Statement in an attempt to have me testify under oath about my mother’s death. This was requested because the investigative search failed to divulge proof of mendacity or statements made falsely and knowingly with the intent to deceive. In violation of my constitutional rights to counsel and against self compulsory testimony, Judge Russell granted the order and attempted to question me under the guise of determining what to do next. I was compelled to testify at Corey Webb’s plea withdrawal hearing that was scheduled for October 21, 2011. Judge Russell ignored my protests that my constitutional rights were violated by the investigative search. Judge Russell and Mr. Vance were well-aware that information obtained from an illegal search cannot be used, including information that is derived from such a search.

According the the Tyler Telegraph’s June 27, 2012 article, Judge Russell submitted himself to an interview with the Tyler Telegraph concerning the allegations. Mr. Vance likewise submitted himself to an interview, which was published with a photo of himself. The Motion to Determine Truthfulness of Statements state that I made disparaging comments about the prosecution. Any purported statement I made has yet to be substantiated. One may wonder what does this have to do with the Webb case and what does this have to do with my mother’s death? I would submit that other than to discredit me – absolutely nothing.

At the start of the October 21, 2012 hearing, Judge Russell attempted to make further inquiry into the circumstances of my mother’s death under the guise of “trying to figure out what to do next.” He did so without advising me of my rights. He attempted to take my response to query acknowledging a statement in my mother’s death certificate as an admission of culpability. This I immediately and emphatically denied. Mr. Bingham requested Judge Russell to drop the matter. Judge Russell refused this request while making an insinuation that I was a bald-face liar. Judge Russell referred the matter to the Presiding Administrative Judge. Judge Joe D. Clayton was assigned to hear further proceedings on the Motion to Determine Truthfulness of Statements.

Judge Russell, presumably with Judge Clayton’s permission, sealed all matters associated with the Motion to Determine Truthfulness of Statements on February 29, 2012. This occurred two days after the Smith County District Attorney was recused from this matter. Afterwards, the Motion to Determine Truthfulness of Statements has been attempted to be converted to a contempt action without legal authority and without having to satisfy long standing legal requirements. This includes a showing of how false statements were knowingly and intentionally made as well as demonstrating the obstruction of the administration of justice. More egregiously, Judge Clayton, the assigned judge, has appointed himself both as the “prosecuting or charging” judge and the “adjudicating” judge of guilt/innocence. As reason and common sense would dictate, the U.S. Supreme Court declared this to be totally impermissible because of the heightened potential for abuse of power. It is important for
you and your readers to know, in matters such as this, I do not have a right to a jury trial, nor do I have a right to an appeal any determination of guilt.

With respect to the accusation of “skipping the hearing,” Mr. James Hagan was quoted as stating “I don’t know why he has not appeared.” Taken in full context, he is being less than candid with this statement. Mr. Hagan and Judge Joe D. Clayton knew I had not received proper notice. The notice upon which I relied was a letter Judge Clayton issued to me that the hearing date was for June 28, 2012. (See attached letter). Accordingly, this date was reflected in my subsequent legal filings to both the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Texas. All of this was filed before June 26, 2012. If this date was incorrect, Mr. Hagan failed to mention or otherwise address it in his responses. It has just been brought to me attention that a Texas Ranger, who was doing a favor for Mr. Hagan, attempted to pass off service of a subpoena upon my father as service to me for a hearing date of June 26, 2012. I have since discovered that Ms. Kelly, whose Motion to Withdraw was not
granted, was requested, presumptively at the urging of Judge Clayton, to make a “ post dated filing” of a notice of hearing motion in an effort to impute notice to me of a June 26, 2012 setting. Mr. Hagan was also aware of this request.

Regrettably, this is not an isolated incident. On February 23, 2012, Judge Clayton held me in contempt for a hearing for which I never received notice and without an opportunity to be heard. In as much as this action clearly violated my constitutional rights, I made a motion for him to set his order aside. Judge Clayton never made a ruling on my motion to set it aside. It was not until June 1, 2012 that Judge Clayton rescinded the order (after I made a challenge of that order to the Tyler Court of Appeals). In that regard, the June 27, 2012 article suggests that all proceedings to the Court of Appeals have been exhausted. Contrary to the article’s suggestion, the matters raised before the higher courts remain pending.

In this country we operate under the rule of law with equity, liberty, and justice for all. To accomplish this fundamental precept, the founding fathers implemented our justice system where those charged with crimes are entitled to a fair determination of guilt or innocence through an adversarial process. In an opinion rendered several decades ago, the United States Supreme Court noted the role of the prosecution as representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, there, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. Corey Webb, as any citizen charged with an offense, was entitled to fair proceedings with th effective assistance of counsel as exemplified through vigorous advocacy. A defense attorney’s obligation is not“get his client off,” but to ensure the integrity of the criminal justice
system and “let the chips fall as may lay.”

This matter has been pursued against me at great public expense. Considerable efforts have been made to prosecute a matter which is not actionable based upon evidence that cannot be used as a result of the illegal search. It arises from, I believe, and is in reprisal for my representation of a juvenile charged with aggravated assault. A blatant attempt was made to thwart my advocacy by subjecting me to ridicule even if it meant the thorough disregard of my constitutional rights. To this effect, the Tyler Telegraph played an instrumental role through its one-sided, tabloid style journalism. Those articles went through considerable lengths to justify the actions taken by the District Attorney’s Office, the Special Prosecutor, and the judiciary of this county. To the best of my knowledge, the Tyler Telegraph has made no attempt to contact me regarding my point of view.

The First Amendment was implemented by the right to a free press. The purpose of a free press is to ensure that governmental affairs are conducted openly and honestly. Unfortunately, this notion has been lost upon Tyler Telegraph publisher. To describe the articles as journalism, investigative or otherwise, would be misleading. Those articles simply constitute propaganda.

My only demand of you is that should you choose to print this letter, that you do so in its entirety. I specifically reserve and do not waive any rights arising from the editing of this letter.

Sincerely,

Joel Mallory, Jr.
Attorney at law

Politics and patent infringement cases in East Texas, what is the connection?

September 21st, 2011

patent litigation law firms and politicsYes, politics do play a part. Well, at least when it comes to patent infringement cases, it seems that it has. An interesting report has gone out where it ranks court districts under certain categories in patent litigation.

The eastern court district of Texas has a strong reputation for being the forum of choice for patent infringement cases, yet surprisingly enough it does not rank first in any of the important categories.

The western district of Wisconsin ranks first when it comes how much time it takes to process a litigation cases with a little over six months, yet they are often overlooked as a forum for the infringement cases.

This has given them quite the chip-on-the-shoulder. So the question begs to be asked, what makes the eastern Texas district more appealing? There is a separation between these two states that is more than six Midwest states and that separation is political worldview.

It is safe to say that the majority of Texas leans conservative and the majority of Wisconsin leans liberal. Taking what we know about the two views, we know that conservative Texans are big on property rights, whether it’s physical or intellectual property.

Now, it’s not to say that the people of Wisconsin don’t feel the same, but when it comes to the whole issue of “what is mine, is mine” there ain’t no place like Texas.

And when it comes to plaintiffs picking there “forum” of choice, the one category that overrules them all is the amount of victories in a district. And where East Texas ranks 7th with a 40 percent win rate, Western Wisconsin ranks 28th with a 24 percent win rate.

There are many factors that can play into why there is such a gap in percentage, but you can bet that part of it is the difference in political views.

Small east Texas towns a stopping place for big time lawyer folk

May 5th, 2011

Who is that suited man? Flashing onto the scene, with head held high, coming to save the day. It’s a bird, it’s a plane, its Superman… er, I mean, a bunch of lawyers? Life in the small towns of Texarkana and Marshall has become increasingly different the past few years and the majority of the population knows nothing about it.

These two towns have become a stopping point for teams of lawyers and legal representatives of big businesses. Many of the local businesses have taken notice because of the increase in patronage but the rest of the inhabitants of these quaint little towns can only scratch their heads and shrug their shoulders in wonder.

Unbeknownst to them, their home town has become battleground for patent infringement litigation cases of the heavy weights of the business world. The likes of Texas Instrument Cisco and TiVo have come to town to settle their cases versus “patent trolls” trying to make a buck off of them.

The oddity of seeing their favorite local restaurants full of suit and ties, of fax machines and copiers being loaded off of trailers and of long-time empty buildings in downtown being renovated has stirred up some questions, but for the most part, normal life continues on.

With the likes of hundreds of millions of dollars hanging in the balance in their court house, John and Jane Doe’s main concern is if “Law & Order” will be a rerun.

The phenomenon taking place in Marshall and Texarkana is the likes of a good western movie. Riding out of the Texas town triumphant, as the dust settles the townspeople look to one another and ask “Who was that suited man?”

Trend in East Texas regarding money hungry patent trolls

April 2nd, 2011

Have you ever had one of those moments when you are watching a movie and there is a particular part that catches your attention and sticks with you until the right moment comes to apply it to your life? Well, mine is from National Treasure and this is the moment.

Remember towards the end of the movie and the good guys are being held hostage and forced to help the bad guys find the treasure? And as they are walking along held at gun point, the wise older father turns to his son, and says “You have to change the status quo.”

Well, imagine me as the wise older father and the court houses of Marshall, Texarkana, and Tyler Texas as the son, “You have to change the status quo.” because your being held hostage.

This trend of money-hungry patent trolls coming to these towns must stop. There has been a status quo established in the eastern district of Texas that has helped to intensify the illegitament business of making money off of bought out patents.

This status quo includes sped up court process specifically for patent infringement and a high percentage of victory for plaintiffs of these cases. Now there is not much you can do about the jury’s findings because jury tampering is illegal.

But one thing to consider is the manner in which the judges are handling the court process of these particular cases. A set of “no nonsense” rules have been established in which lawyers are given a limit of time to present all paper work and are timed by a chess timer when presenting their case in which they are abruptly stopped if the timer goes off.

These types of things are a major part of why their courts are found so appealing for this abuse. In order for these judges to continue their commitment to the betterment of our nation they must change the status quo held in their court houses.

The right to intellectual property and the quagmire of patent trolling in East Texas

March 2nd, 2011

george washington carverThe history of patents in the USA is synominis with names like Thomas Edison, George Washington Carver, Albert Einstein, and Bill Gates. Because with each invention and innovation that was thought up of, there was the need for a patent.

Among the many things that factored into becoming the great nation we are is innovation. We have throughout our history found a way to keep speeding ahead with new technology that bettered the lives of Americans and others across the globe.

And in this modern age we continue to look for that “next step” that would continue to elevate us to the next level. Yet, there is one, minor, practice that has both the potential to hinder innovation and leave a scar in our history.

The term, “patent troll” refers to a company that buys and uses patents for the sole purpose of bringing other businesses to court for patent infringement. Besides the unethical method of “business” they are using to gain wealth, is that this type of practice hinders innovation.

The institution of patents and licensing in our nation follows some of our basic principles and beliefs that each man has a right to his property. We can think of patents as the holding of one’s “intellectual” property.

And with a patent an individual has the freedom to pursue their invention with the peace of knowing that it is protected from theft. But, what’s more, is that this encourages the creation of technology. What we find with these patent trolls is an abuse of the system.

As they utilize they protection of held patents to earn royalties and compensation, they sit back with their profit without any purpose or plan to follow through to create or build their invention. That’s right, not only do they not make the patent into a realization, but they punish other businesses that have.

When we observe the things that have come out of the excellence of work of some men in history, it is so sad to see what some individuals are doing to hinder that from going on.