Criminal Defense Strategy is vital
Ausum Law Firm will work with you to plan out a clear strategy before going to court. Albert Usumanu has over 20 years of knowledge in the Minnesota legal system and he will work to make sure your justice is served.
After the criminal defendant tells his or her story to their criminal defense attorney, they will probably collaborate with each other to come up with a strategy that will work best in court. Generally speaking, this strategy will be based upon the story that the defendant tells his or her attorney, but will probably not be exactly the same. Coming up with a defense strategy is not as simple as telling the truth in a way that shows the defendant’s innocence or lessened legal culpability. Instead, it will often involve weighing witnesses’ credibility, figuring out the reputation between the community and the police as well as various other legal factors. In sum, all of these considerations will go into making a “theory of the case” that will be based upon the defendant’s story as well as other provable facts.
To look at how a great criminal defense strategy is created, let’s look at an example. Suppose that a criminal defendant has been charged with burglary. The defendant goes to an attorney’s office and tells his story, which he also confessed to the police after being arrested. Apparently, the man was identified by an eyewitness shortly after the burglary took place. The witness is not certain of the identification, but is “pretty sure” he got the right face. The defendant tells his attorney that, although he was present at the scene of the crime, he did not take part in the execution of the crime. Instead, he merely went along so that his friends would not think less of him. In addition, when the defendant was arrested, the police did not inform him of his right to be silent or his right to have an attorney present when he was questioned.
In the three categories above, this story would best be classified as a “confession” story because the defendant knew about the crime and was present while it was committed. However, the defense strategy would most likely be based upon a theory that the police used a weak eyewitness’s account to make a stronger case then they should have and bullied the defendant into giving a confession. This is a theory that is based in truth and shows the defendant in a better light.
Putting this theory forward in court could be very beneficial to the defendant. Indeed, the defense attorney would probably file a pre-trial motion asking for the confession to the police to be omitted from the record because the police engaged in an unconstitutional questioning by not reading the defendant his Miranda warning. In addition, the defense attorney would also probably try to question the eyewitness and show that the identification was so flimsy that it would not establish “beyond a reasonable doubt” the true identify of the perpetrator. Depending upon the strength of the arguments, this theory could have its goal for the case to come back with a verdict of not-guilty, or for the prosecutor to offer a plea bargain to a lesser charge.
Do not go to court alone. Let the legal experts at Ausum Law Firm plan out a clear strategy for you to win your case. Contact us for a free consultation.
Source: Yahoo Answers