Anyone second this motion?
The winner of the 2003 Legal Document of the Year Award — a multipage treatise on constitutionality of the word “Fuck” (and whether a juvenile can be prosecuted for calling a school official a “fucker”).
I’m highly amused that the first cite is to Wikipedia. In fact, the motion extensively quotes that site. I wonder if it’s sufficiently authoritative, however, it be legally dispositive. It certainly has no primary authority.
Any opinions as to whether this motion to dismiss is ineffective assistance of counsel or highly effective assistance? The motion was never ruled upon — the client entered a plea bargain.
(This was brought to you by Greg N.)