Dan Hull at  What About Client? is absolutely right.  Lawyers should only represent clients they actually like.

Now this isn’t always an option, as public defenders and assigned counsel aren’t given an option as to whom they represent.  But one of the hallmarks of a private practice is the ability to pick your clients.  As my legal ethics prof in law school loved to say, “lawyers aren’t buses; they don’t have to pick up anybody waiting at the stop.” 

Too often, criminal defense lawyers take any case that walks in the door.  It has more to do with whether they have any loose change in their pocket than anything else, which relates to another pervasive issue.  But they don’t care whether they like the client.  They like the client’s money, and that’s good enough for them.

Not for me.  When I meet a new client, it is always my decision whether I want to take his case.  The client may well be interviewing me, but I’m interviewing the client as well.  It has nothing to do with whether they are guilty or innocent, or whether they are telling me the truth.  It rarely has anything to do with the nature of the offense, though I do not accept cases involving offenses against children (particularly sex offenses) unless I am persuaded that the defendant is innocent.  This is my one open issue as a criminal defense lawyer, and while others totally disagree with me, this is where I draw the line.

My interview is for the purpose of determining whether the representation will be a good fit.  A long time ago, I came to realize that working with defendants that I like makes a world of difference in my enjoyment of my work.  No, it doesn’t make it necessarily fun to be a criminal defense lawyer, as you’re still stuck with prosecutors and judges who may be markedly unpleasant, but it prevents a certain degree of misery.  Life is too short to make yourself miserable day after day.   

Liking your client has nothing to do with wanting to hang out with them, be like them, have them over for dinner.  It’s about having the ability to talk to them, show mutual respect and work with them productively.  If there was one word to describe what I look for, it’s respect.  No, not their respect toward me, but mine toward them.  If I find that I can’t muster respect for them, then my experience tells me that this will not work.

I’ve had many crazy client (a group that seems to have increased significantly in the past few years, by the way) who have been very satisfying to work with.  I’ve had remarkable success representing people with varying types of psychological problems and intellectual deficits, both in beating the case and getting them properly diagnosed and treated.  My approach toward clients is holistic, and if I can provide them with broader help than just as a lawyer, I do so.  This is particularly true when their families, schools, the system, have failed them.  Somebody has to take enough of an interest in their welfare to help them.

Naturally, professionals are the best clients to represent.  No, not doctors and lawyers, but professional criminals.  They understand that laws exists and that their conduct violates them.  The criminal justice system is a cost of doing business to them.  While they never meet the publics’ perception of sophistication about the system, they understood the risks they took and show the greatest appreciation of effort, regardless of result.  They are sophisticated enough to realize that lawyers aren’t plumbers; We can’t guarantee that we can stop the leak.

And what of doctors, lawyers, top-level executives?  White collar defendants are often the most difficult to work with in the beginning.  They are often incapable of comprehending their role in a prosecution at first, since they don’t perceive themselves as criminal defendants.  They are often too smart for their own good, trying to outsmart the lawyer or wanting to be involved in every aspect of decision-making.  They are “social equivalents” of the lawyer, and hence fight against the lawyer’s fulfillment of his role in order to maintain their status.

Ironically, white collar defendants are often the people who, under slightly different circumstances, would be the ones you would have to your home for dinner.  But not when you’re representing them.  If they cannot get it into their head that they are the client and you are the lawyer, then the representation will be unfulfilling and ineffective.  With gentle understanding, I find that they will slowly come to the realization that, for the purpose of the case, you are the lawyer and they are the client. 

But white collar defendants can be terribly overbearing as well.  Some will refuse to accept the respective roles of lawyer and client, and insist on being in control of their representation.  They will project their anger and frustration of the attorney, as if it’s the attorney’s fault that they were arrested and prosecuted.  They will make irresponsible demands, both of time and outcome.  Sometimes, this happens because they have no place else to vent and desperately need a catharsis.  Other times, it’s purely money-driven.  They pay you so you must do what they say. 

When I stand beside a defendant in court, I act as the shield between that one human being and everything else in the world.  If the proverbial bullet comes, I take the hit.  The bottom line is that once I accept a case, I accept the possibility that I will be called on to stand in front of that bullet and I am committed to doing so.  I’m not going to do it for a client I don’t like.

All said, over my 25 years, I’m happy to say that I’ve held firm to this position.  Money has never swayed me.  Hot cases have never turned my head.  And the results, both for my clients and myself, have proven over and over that it was the right choice.