Individuals arrested or arraigned for criminal offenses often feel a sense of panic. They recognize that state prosecutors usually do not bring charges unless they believe they have the evidence necessary to secure a criminal conviction.
In other words, the prosecutor believes that they have evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the person accused broke a specific state statute. Even those who insist they did not break the law may plead guilty because they are unsure of how they could potentially defend against the allegations they face. Defense attorneys understand the criminal court process and can, therefore, help defendants respond to the state’s allegations.
How do criminal defense lawyers sometimes address the evidence the state intends to use during a criminal trial?
Excluding it from criminal proceedings
One of the most effective ways of addressing the state’s evidence is to prevent the prosecutor from presenting it during the trial. If the defense attorney can establish that police officers broke the law or violated the rights of a defendant, they fight the use of that evidence. They can potentially ask the courts to exclude ill-gotten evidence from criminal proceedings. By doing so, they can either pave the way for a simple defense strategy or convince the courts to dismiss the pending charges against their client.
Highlighting issues with evidence collection, storage or testing
There are different scientific procedures required to preserve and validate different types of evidence. Small violations of proper procedure can undermine the usefulness of the evidence gathered by law enforcement. For example, failing to maintain chain of custody records about when people accessed and handled evidence after police officers gathered it could raise questions about contamination or tampering. When lawyers identify technical mistakes regarding the collection and analysis of evidence, that can provide a way to question usefulness of the evidence.
Countering the state’s conclusion
It is possible for a well-trained expert to review the state’s evidence and reach a much different conclusion than police officers and prosecutors have. Many attorneys bring in expert witnesses as part of a comprehensive criminal defense strategy. By providing an alternate analysis of the evidence, an expert witness can raise questions about the claims made by the state. In some cases, expert witnesses can show that the state reached the wrong conclusion. Other times, they may be able to identify alternate suspects or a different explanation for the situation.
Defendants who have the support of a criminal defense attorney are in the best possible position to respond assertively to criminal charges. The state’s evidence does not always hold up under scrutiny during a criminal trial. Raising questions about the state’s evidence can be an important element of a defense strategy.
