Challenging the Evidence in Federal Criminal Court

Most evidence is admissible in federal court unless that evidence is unduly prejudicial. A prior criminal record is the classic example of unduly prejudicial evidence. If jurors hear such evidence, while it may be relevant to the case at hand, they may convict the defendant because s/he’s a bad person, not because s/he committed the crime at hand.

The government has a very high burden of proof in criminal cases. To overcome the presumption of evidence, prosecutors must prove every element of every charge beyond any reasonable doubt. So, undermining the evidence may be the best strategy for a Tampa criminal defense lawyer. At trial, the issue is not whether the defendant is guilty or innocent. Guilt and innocence are moral concepts. The issue is what can the state prove. Proof, based on relevant evidence, is a legal concept.

Lineups and Investigations

Most photo and live lineups are single-blind lineups. The witness doesn’t know the suspect’s identity, but the administering officer knows. Therefore, officers often give witnesses hints. Placing the suspect in the middle of a lineup is a good example.

Double blind lineups (neither the officer nor the witness knows who the suspect is) are much more reliable.

There’s a difference between reliability and accuracy. Bill might accurately select a suspect from an unreliable lineup. Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut, and even unreliable lineups are occasionally accurate.

Single-photo lineups illustrate a different problem. In these situations, the witness is under a great deal of pressure to say “that’s the guy.” Multiple photo lineups greatly relieve that pressure. Modified instructions (e.g. the suspect may or may not be in the lineup) relieve the pressure even further.

Eyewitness Testimony

Reliability issues taint witness identifications, and memory issues taint eyewitness testimony. A criminal trial may begin almost a year following the criminal incident. By that time, most memories have almost completely degraded. If a witness has no independent recollection of an event, a Tampa criminal defense lawyer can prevent that witness from testifying in court.

Failure to recall details not in a police report indicates a serious memory issue. These details could be unrelated to the crime, such as the weather at the time.

Eyewitness testimony itself has reliability issues. Extreme stress affects memory. In one famous test, actors brutally interrogated people for about two hours. The next day, the questioned individuals couldn’t pick the actors out of lineups. The extreme stress of the moment corrupted their memories.

Scientific Evidence

Federal prosecutors use scientific evidence whenever possible. Most jurors have watched countless episodes of CSI: Wherever. So, they believe such evidence is accurate and reliable.

That’s true in a few cases. Fingerprints, ballistics, and DNA evidence are very reliable, at least for some purposes.

Sometimes, prosecutors overplay their hand. DNA evidence in a sexual assault case is a good example. This evidence may prove the defendant and alleged victim had rough sex, but it doesn’t prove that sex was not consensual.

Other “scientific evidence” is mostly science fiction. This category includes evidence like tire tacks, clothing fibers, and shoe prints. This evidence proves the defendant drove a pickup, wore a cotton shirt, and had size 10 feet. That data doesn’t exactly narrow it down and certainly doesn’t point to a particular person.

Contact a Savvy Hillsborough County Attorney

A criminal charge is not the same thing as a criminal conviction. For a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal defense lawyer in Tampa, contact the OA Law Firm. Virtual, home, and jail visits are available.

Source:

.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_401