tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-768084091191679773.post6912746599366510058..comments2023-10-31T09:36:44.384-07:00Comments on Jeffrey Denner's ineffective assistance of counsel: The Unconstitutional Court order that tries to protect prominent Boston Lawyer Jeffrey Denner in a solid legal malpractice case against him.opencourtshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18116221293792891520noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-768084091191679773.post-85457179010475864902008-12-02T19:17:00.000-08:002008-12-02T19:17:00.000-08:00The Court won't let Plaintiff Gillenwater file his...The Court won't let Plaintiff Gillenwater file his Motion for Summary Judgment that started like this:<BR/><BR/>I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT<BR/>Summary Judgment means that it is obvious to a Judge that the Jury would only vote one way, in my favor, after looking at all of the relevant facts. Rule 56. Expert witnesses are not necessary to prove Summary Judgment but in my case expert witness Judge Diane Moriarty already ruled in granting me a New Trial that Defendants Denner and Barron <BR/><BR/>“Denied the Defendant his right to effective assistance of counsel,” and “Commonwealth’s argument that these failures by counsel are tactical choices is without merit,” and “Therefore Motion for New Trial due to ineffective assistance of counsel is allowed.”<BR/>Her Honor also stated:<BR/><BR/>“The Court finds that due to Attorney Barron’s inattention to the Motion to Suppress both by way of law and argument and not obtaining transcripts or even ordering transcripts of the hearing such inefficiency and behavior falls measurably below what is acceptable.”<BR/><BR/>Order granting New Trial, June 13, 2003. Attachment 1.opencourtshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18116221293792891520noreply@blogger.com