Defense Attorney: “I am moving to suppress the officer’s testimony.” Prosecution: “Why? We disclosed the evidence as soon as we got it.” -Flashback 12 hours- It is the night before trial and your email shows a new message. It is from the attorney you will be in trial with – tomorrow morning. He writes, “We just realized that there is some evidence we intend use tomorrow that you are unaware of.” It turns out the officer who arrested your client
Stephen Lemons | New Times As Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery fights to keep Debra Milke behind bars pending a retrial on her overturned murder conviction, he also is fighting a proposed rule to the State Bar of Arizona that would require prosecutors to act on new evidence of a wrongful conviction. For the past two years, the Arizona Justice Project has petitioned the Arizona Supreme Court to change the State Bar of Arizona’s ethics rules, adding a provision based
Here is latest news article on the Milke case. It discusses the potential conflict of interest issues with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) prosecuting her case after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed her conviction. The court’s ruling was based upon MCAO’s prior violation of their duty to disclose exculpatory evidence pursuant to Brady v. Maryland. Anna Edney | Bloomberg News as reported in the Arizona Republic An Arizona woman awaiting retrial on charges she had a part
I have seen jury consultant Robert Hirschhorn lecture several times (and stolen lots of his material for my own cases.) When It was revealed he worked on the Zimmerman case, I immediately understood how the defense overcame the “knock knock” joke in opening statements. Here is an article from USA Today explaining some of the jury selection strategies Hirschhorn used. SANFORD, Fla. — One of the people instrumental in helping George Zimmerman’s defense team pick an all-female jury says that
Yesterday I included the Milke case as one of my favorite Brady decisions. For the non-lawyers, Brady refers to the U.S. Supreme Court case of Brady v. Maryland which held that when the government withholds exculpatory evidence it is a violation of due process “where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment.” Think of it this way, you are charged with a crime and there is evidence that you may actually be innocent. The police, or the
“Knock, knock.” “Who’s there?” says George Zimmerman. Answer – a guilty verdict. http://tinyurl.com/pzudpa7
This month the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected the argument that a judge does not have the discretion to hold a pretrial hearing on the reliability of scientific evidence. Since January 1, 2012 when Arizona adopted the Federal Daubert standard for safeguarding against junk science, several prosecutorial agencies have tried to persuade trial courts that things were “business as usual” despite the new rules of evidence. However, the February 5, 2013 ruling from Division One of the Arizona Court of
At the core of the United States Constitution is the principle of Due Process. In its most basic form, this principle provides that the government must respect all of the legal rights owed to the people. One of those legal rights is the guarantee of a fair trial to a person accused of a crime.A fair trial includes preventing the State from unfair or suggestive identifications which would direct a witness to make a false identification. The most common situation
I have done a number of speeches on DUI prevention. During my speeches I always try to show what happens when a drunk driver kills another person. It is easy to communicate what happens to the family of the deceased. However, showing what happens to the person who kills another, beyond the legal consequences, is a more difficult task. Renowned trial lawyer Gerry Spence’s blog entry “on Murder” eloquently touches upon this point. Mr. Spence writes: “You can never beat
© 2023 All rights reserved for Koplow Law Firm.