Police Officers May Not Testify That They They Believe the Defendant is Guilty
Evidence as to what was said by an interrogating police officer during the interrogation, including testimony that officer told the suspect/defendant that he thought he was lying in denying committing the crime is arguably admissible as it tended to explain to the jury the circumstances of the alleged statements, thereby countering a claim that the statement was not voluntarily obtained (People v Walden, 148 AD2d 971 [4th Dept 1989]). However, in People v Pabon...
read moreOne Apparently Wrongful Conviction Results in Two Important Decisions from the Second Circuit
In 1993, Hector Rivas was convicted of the 1987 murder of his former girlfriend. The prosecution defeated Mr.Rivas’s alibi by relying on the testimony of the medical examiner which placed the time of death as occuring on the day prior to that for which Mr. Rivas had an alibi. What was noteworthy about this testimony was that for the six years prior to trial the medical examiner had placed the time of death on...
read moreA Rose By Any Other Name
by William T. Easton, a/k/a “Bill”, a/k/a “Billy” In recent years our firm has noted the prosecution’s increased use of monikers or “a/k/a”s in the captions of indictments, especially for those defendants charged federally with gang-associated offenses such as Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) crimes, CCE (Continued Criminal Enterprise) crimes, and defendants charged state-side with gang-related offenses. Oddly, this firm has not detected a similar increase in our white collar practice, even in conspiracy...
read moreOnce Again: Statutory Language Cannot Be Simply Ignored By Prosecutors
The New York Court of Appeals, in People v Brumfield (2015 NY Slip Op 01377 [2/17/15]), affirmed the holding of the Appellate Division, Fourth Department (109 AD3d 1105 [4th Dept 9/27/13]), that the District Attorney cannot condition a defendant’ right to testify at the grand jury on the defendant’s willingness to sign a waiver form that waives more rights than required by CPL 190.45 and 190.50. As discussed in a post after the Appellate...
read morePolice Ignorance Is An Excuse Under Federal, But Not New York, Law
by Jill Paperno, Esq., author of Representing the Accused:A Practical Guide to Criminal Defense and Brian Shiffrin, Esq., Easton Thompson Kasperek Shiffrin LLP On December 15, 2014, in Heien v. North Carolina, the United States Supreme Court found that a police officer’s mistaken belief that the law required two working brake lights, when it only required one, which led to a stop and consent search of a vehicle, was reasonable, and as such, the product of the...
read more