Complaint
One: Following is a complaint a copy of which was reportedly sent to The
Supreme Court Disciplinary Board Of Rhode Island. April 22, 1999 Derek
Isom writes:
Atty. Borges came to the ACI to see me. I explained to him I was picked up
on a warrant and interrogated on charges of unlawful delivery to an undercover police
officer. Other than a brief description given by someone at the ACI, none of the
information regarding this unlawful delivery pointed to me.![]()
I explained to Atty. Borges that during the police interrogation it became
clear if I didn't "give the police someone, anyone", they were going to charge
me with this offense. I refused and was charged and arraigned for unlawful delivery.![]()
Atty. Borges took my information and told me he would return with an answer on whether he would represent me and what the price would be. He returned two days later saying he had talked to the prosecutor and the Cranston Police Department and they agreed that my probation wouldn't be violated and I would be set free on bail.
I made clear to Atty. Borges that on the basis he was able to make good on the promise that I would be set free on bail without any probation violation I would retain him. Atty. Borges agreed. I paid Atty. Borges in advance $2,500 [two thousand five hundred] for his fee and $2,500 [two thousand five hundred] for bail.
Weeks passed and all I could get was excuses from Atty. Borges. Finally,
I was brought into court and discovered I was going to my probation violation hearing
which, according to Atty. Borges' promise, wasn't supposed to happen. Atty. Borges
continued to make excuses and apologized.![]()
![]()
![]()
I began to question Atty. Borges on his expertise in criminal matters and discovered his area of expertise was in Real Estate matters. I discovered I was one of Atty. Borges's first criminal cases.
Atty. Borges handling of my case was unethical and a far cry from aggressively pursuing my defense. Atty. Borges never properly investigated my case. At my probation violation hearing I, not Atty. Borges, was the one who demanded to confront the informer in the case. Only then did Atty. Borges relay this to Judge Pheiffer. The Judge agreed and set bail. It was my research and knowledge that accomplished this, not the expertise of Atty. Borges.
I tried to retrieve my expenses for this violation hearing from Atty. Borges
but he refused to cooperate saying he did his job. He also said if the informer came
forward, that would be our only problem.
Atty. Borges never found out the name of the informant. I had to research
and discover information about the informer via an address given in my information
package. Atty. Borges made no effort to contact, summons or get an affidavit from
the informant.
I had to contact the informer myself and I discovered the events of the night
in question. The informer agreed to testify on my behalf that the police had the
wrong person. Atty. Borges insisted the court would still find me in violation of my
probation on the police officer's testimony.![]()
Being unable to get any effective defense from Atty. Borges, I was forced into
taking a plea bargain and am serving nine months due to Atty. Borges's unethical conduct
and ineffective assistance of counsel. I, Derek Isom, do swear every word in this
document is truthful, honest and fully integrated with all the facts of my case.![]()
![]()
We are awaiting the response from the Supreme Court Disciplinary Council
Search this site! |
|
Use The Back Button On Your Browser Or Go to the Caught! Home Page |
| View The Secret Canons And The Black Is White Law Dictionary |
| The Pro Se Way |
EMAIL Caught! right now!