Please be advised that registration for all Training Division Events is limited to persons who provide services pursuant to the Federal Criminal Justice Act (CJA). For more information please read our Training Events Registration Disclaimer.
If you have any questions about registering, please emailus.
Fundamentals of Federal Criminal Defense - Virtual Program (Recordings)
Fundamentals is designed for those new to federal criminal defense practice and addresses topics that you will likely encounter in your practice, such as ways to recognize and reduce racial injustice in the federal courts, the Bail Reform Act, the essential role of investigation in CJA cases, mental health issues, discovery and motion practice, pleas and proffers, the basics of sentencing and the sentencing guidelines, application of the sentencing guidelines, the categorical approach, the Bureau of Prison, and federal appeals.
Materials and links for the sessions are provided by clicking this link.
21 - 24
Virtual Non-Capital Sentencing Mitigation Skills Workshop
The Non-Capital Sentencing Mitigation Skills Workshop will take place virtually this year from Monday, June 21 through Thursday, June 24, 2021. This program will be open to Federal Defender staff and non-capital mitigation social workers, sentencing advocates, attorneys and other professionals working under the Criminal Justice Act (CJA).
Using a storytelling approach, this workshop presents a hands-on method on the development of non-capital mitigation and its integration into persuasive sentencing advocacy. Through plenary and small group sessions, participants will further their understanding on non-capital mitigation evidence and the skills necessary to effectively interview for mitigation; investigate, collect and analyze records; and write reports and/or sentencing memoranda.
In the small group sessions, participants will use their own pending federal cases to develop themes and theories, practice interviewing, storytelling, and persuasive writing techniques. Please note that due to the workshop format of this program, participation in all parts of the program is mandatory.
The live small group workshop sessions will take place Monday through Thursday (June 21-24), 3:00 - 5:30 p.m. EDT.
Is It the End of the World as We Know It or Do We Feel Fine? How Palomar-Santiago Did (and Didn't) Change Collateral Challenges to Prior Removal Orders Under § 1326(d).
In Palomar-Santiago, the Supreme Court addressed collateral challenges to underlying removal orders in illegal reentry prosecutions for the first time since Mendoza-Lopez, the watershed decision it issued 34 years ago. But did Palomar-Santiago gut our precedent, open up new arguments, or some of both? This webinar will discuss the procedural history and holding of Palomar-Santiago, the negative effects it could have in some circuits, and creative strategies for using it to expand our litigation options in other circuits.
Joseph Camden is an Assistant Federal Public Defender in the Richmond office of the Eastern District of Virginia. Before coming to Richmond in 2017, he spent seven years as a trial attorney at Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., where he focused on litigating illegal reentry cases and categorical approach issues. And before that, he spent a couple years teaching English in Siberia. He is available for advice or to share briefing on categorical approach issues any time.
Kara Hartzler is an appellate attorney at the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. Prior to joining the Federal Defenders, she served as the Legal Director and Criminal Immigration Consultant at the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project in Arizona, where she specialized in the immigration consequences of criminal convictions. She has authored numerous books, articles, and resources for defense attorneys, including Surviving Padilla: A Defender’s Guide to Advising Noncitizens on the Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions. Kara also served as an adjunct professor at the University of Arizona College of Law and testified in front of the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Immigration on the detention and deportation of citizens and other due process violations in the immigration system. She is the recipient of the 2018 E. Stanley Conant Award, the 2017 Outstanding Assistant Federal Defender award, the 2013 David Carliner Public Interest Award, the 2013 Randy Tunac Courage in Immigration Award, and the 2010 Robert J. Hooker Award for service to the defender community.
The Training Division is not applying for CLE for this webinar.
WHY Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Is A Severe Developmental Disorder: Looking At The Neurobehavioral And Neurocognitive Deficits In Each Client
In Floyd v. Baker, 949 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2020), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit clearly failed to understand the severity of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) as a mitigating factor in a capital case by comparing it to attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Despite nearly 50 years of research that has documented the severity of FASD—which is clearly a “developmental disability” that occurs at birth (in utero)—the court minimized FASD as a mitigating factor. The court failed to recognize FASD as a permanent developmental disability that gets worse over time. Instead it compared FASD as being equivalent to having ADHD. Unlike ADHD, FASD is equivalent to having an intellectual disability. See Stephen Greenspan & Natalie Novick Brown & William Edwards, FASD and the Concept of “Intellectual Disability Equivalence,” in Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders in Adults: Ethical and Legal Perspective 241-66 (Monty Nelson & Margerite Trussler eds., 2015).
This webinar will explain why FASD is a more severe developmental disability and make further recommendations on how to get a proper diagnosis of FASD. It will also discuss what experts to use and how to connect the dots with your experts on how the neurobehavioral and neurodevelopmental behaviors get worse over time and how they relate to your client’s case. We will also address why IQ can be misleading, as people with FASD have lower adaptive behavioral scores and often have lower test scores on executive functioning measures, but have full Scale IQ’s above 70. See William Edwards & Stephen Greenspan, Adaptive Behavior and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, 38 J. Psychiatry & L. 419 (2010). Finally, it will address issues of suggestibility and gullibility as it relates to your clients neurobehavioral and neurocognitive deficits.
Dr. Stephen Greenspan, Ph.D., is Emeritus Professor of Educational Psychology (U of Connecticut) and Clinical Professor of Psychiatry (U of Colorado). Author of books and papers on gullibility and social incompetence, especially in vulnerable populations. He is a pioneer and leader in the field of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) and a forensic consultant, mostly in criminal cases, around issues of cognitive and adaptive incompetence.
Dr. Richard S. Adler, M.D., is a Seattle-based Board-certified Adult, Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist. After completing an adult psychiatry residency at Harvard Medical School/McLean Hospital in Belmont, MA, he completed a Fellowship in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, MA. Dr. Adler was Medical Director of the Mental Health Clinics in Somerset and Worcester Counties, MD, for four years, serving as a National Health Services Scholar. Shortly after moving to Seattle in 1996, he joined the staff of Children's Hospital and remained there for over 10 years. Dr. Adler completed a Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship at the University of Washington School of Medicine in 2000. He has been retained by The State of Washington, Seattle Public Schools, Northshore School System, State of Alaska Public Defender, King County Juvenile Court, as well as numerous attorneys. Dr. Adler’s full resume is available at https://fcpsych.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/RSA-Resume-v10262020-2.pdf
William J. Edwards is a Deputy Public Defender with the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office and has served in that position since 2001. He has worked with clients who have been diagnosed with FASD since 1998. Mr. Edwards is assigned to the mental health court where he represents clients in conservatorship and competency proceedings. Since 1996, Mr. Edwards has specialized in the representation of people with developmental disabilities in the criminal justice system.
Prior to working in Los Angeles, Mr. Edwards worked with the Office of the Public Defender in San Diego and Riverside County, California. From 1999 to 2001, Mr. Edwards worked as a staff attorney for the Office of the Capital Collateral Counsel in Tallahassee, Florida representing inmates under sentence of death in state and federal court.
Since 1996 to 2001 on a pro bono basis, Mr. Edwards has represented inmates with intellectual disabilities or mental illness on death row nationwide, including inmates in Texas, Nebraska, Mississippi, Louisiana and Florida. He has authored numerous articles on the subject of people with intellectual disabilities in the criminal justice system and his scholarship has been cited by the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Edwards has testified and/or consulted with numerous state and federal legislative bodies and panels.
Supreme Court Update with Jeffrey Fisher
This session provides an update on recent Supreme Court decisions affecting federal criminal practice and reviews issues currently under consideration, as well as possible issues for the future.
Jeffrey Fisher is a professor at Stanford Law School and co-director of its Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. He is also special counsel at O’Melveny & Myers LLP. His academic and Supreme Court work runs the gamut of federal constitutional and statutory matters, with an emphasis on criminal procedure issues.
Professor Fisher has argued over forty cases in the Supreme Court. Among his successes are Riley v. California and Carpenter v. United States, involving the Fourth Amendment’s application to digital information, and Crawford v. Washington and Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, involving the Confrontation Clause. Professor Fisher was also co-counsel for the plaintiffs in Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees same-sex couples a right to marry. In 2006, the National Law Journal named him one of the 100 most influential lawyers in the country – the youngest person on the list – and he has remained on that list ever since.
Professor Fisher formerly served as a law clerk to Justice John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court of the United States and to Judge Stephen Reinhardt on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He also is a recipient of the Heeney Award, the highest honor bestowed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.