E

Key Points on Defense Strategies and Trial Procedures

  • Adjournment Requests

    • Requesting a three to four week adjournment to locate witnesses.
    • Importance of having all necessary evidence and witnesses before proceeding.

  • Evidence Disclosure

    • The defense must be informed about the evidence against them, which is classified as oral or written evidence.
    • This requirement leads to a Huntley hearing, where the admissibility of statements against the defendant is evaluated.

  • Understanding Statements and Identification Proceedings

    • Section 710.30 mandates disclosure of any statements made by the defendant and post-incident identification procedures.
    • Example: Menendez Case
    • The case of the Menendez brothers, where prior sexual conduct evidence between the father and sons was contentious.
    • First trial allowed more evidence leading to a hung jury; subsequent trial precluded this evidence, showcasing the impact of judicial decisions on trial outcomes.

  • Preclusion of Evidence

    • Judges can limit what evidence may be presented, particularly with regard to prejudicial information.
    • Example: A drug and weapons case where evidence of a defendant’s presence at a bar during a shooting was challenged for its relevance.

  • Legal Instructions and Joint Trials

    • In multi-defendant trials, legal instructions may be used to prevent juries from using evidence against one defendant that should only pertain to another.
    • This is known as a curative instruction.

  • Federal Court Procedures

    • Federal procedural rules can be seen as biased towards the prosecution.
    • For instance, in summation, the prosecution gets to make their case first and rebuttal, while the defense gets to speak last, creating an imbalance.

  • Sentencing in Federal Cases

    • A defendant found not guilty of one charge can still be sentenced based on evidence of a related charge, without being convicted, if the judge believes they were involved based on a preponderance of evidence (See United States v. Fatico).
    • This raises serious concerns about fairness in sentencing practices in federal courts.

  • Motions for Severance

    • Under Sections 200.2 and 200.4 of the Criminal Procedure Law, defendants can motion to separate their trials from co-defendants or separate charges in the same trial.
    • Example: If co-defendants have antagonistic defenses—that is, each blames the other in their defense strategies—severance may be granted based on prejudicial spillover.
    • Bruton v. United States: This case underscores that a defendant cannot be tried with a co-defendant whose statements implicating them in a crime are admitted as evidence, especially if the co-defendant invokes the Fifth Amendment, thereby denying cross-examination.

  • Dual Jury Trials

    • In situations where co-defendants’ statements might violate the Bruton ruling, a dual jury trial may be employed.
    • Each jury would hear different parts of the evidence, with limitations placed on what the respective juries can consider to ensure a fair trial without prejudicial influence from partial evidence.

  • Conclusion:

    • Understanding these legal intricacies is crucial for effective defense or prosecution in criminal cases.
    • Awareness of rights regarding evidence disclosure, the impact of judicial rulings, and procedural nuances significantly influences trial outcomes.