Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of witness testimony
Importance of witness testimony
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of witness testimony
Appellant has been provided with declarations from his prior counsel during previous felonies used by the state as aggravating circumstances. Michael Van Cavage was defense counsel for Appellant in 1983, when Appellant was convicted in Escambia County of robbery, burglary, kidnapping, and weapons offenses. See Exhibit 1. John Bigham is a retired lawyer who formerly practiced criminal defense in the State of Texas. See Exhibit 2. In 1991, Mr. Bigham was appointed to represent Appellant on a burglary charge in Bell County, Texas.
Mr. Rollo, Appellant’s counsel for the 2000 murder trial in Florida, did not contact either lawyer before or during the penalty phase. Had Mr. Rollo contacted either, both would have provided information concerning Appellant’s prior convictions that would have been relevant to diminishing the weight of the prior-felony/parole status aggravating factors or other aggravators alleged by the State.
For instance, before trial on the 1982 offenses, Mr. Van Cavage moved for the appointment of two psychiatric experts to evaluate Appellant’s competency and his mental state. In his motion, Mr. Van Cavage stated that he had reason to believe that Appellant may have been incompetent at the time of the offense and may be incompetent to assist counsel. The court agreed to appoint the State’s expert, Dr. B.R. Ogburn, M.D., to
…show more content…
Ogburn examined Appellant on three separate occasions, reviewed court documents, and interviewed Mark Bowden, a friend of Appellant’s who was with him on the evening prior to the 1982 offenses. Dr. Ogburn concluded that, on the night of the crimes, Appellant was intoxicated and succumbed to loss of control stemming from a woman turning him down for another man. Dr. Ogburn further concluded that Appellant’s crimes were not planned or premeditated, but the result of emotional “triggering” that had occurred on the previous night. Dr. Ogburn concluded that Appellant was unable to form specific intent for the 1982
A forty-six-year-old man named Lawrence M. Bradford had filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Syracuse, New York. Bradford claimed that police officers Chad D. Frederick and Shane M. Ryan entered his residence without a warrant, although his roommate Shara Bixby, let the officers into the house. Mr. Bradford said that the officers forced Shara Bixby into letting them into the residence after she had told police that he was not home. The two officers were there to arrest Mr. Bradford for his part in the assault of another man. Bradford pleaded guilty in Jefferson County Court in August 2013 to second-degree assault. Mr. Bradford and another man was accused of stealing money and property from Jeffrey Jewett in Watertown, New York, while striking him on the head and body, causing a cut above the victim’s
...merican Psychological Association. The APA submits an arguments that an accurate proceeding requires an adversary hearing, the assistance of mental health professionals, and decision makers to specify in writing the factors relied upon making decision.
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
The court system includes the judges, jury, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The Attorneys convince the suspects to take plea bargains, the judges are sometimes unfair in the decisions they make, and the prosecutors overlook exculpatory evidence. Picking cotton shows in detail some common errors of the court system. During Ronald Cotton 's first trial, His Attorney, Phil Moseley, tried to bring a memory expert to testify on the unreliability of memory but the judge denied his request. After Ronald 's case was overturned by the supreme court, he got a new trial in another court which had even more problems and bias. First, there was racial prejudice during the jury selection. “Four black people from the community got called in for jury duty. The judge himself dismissed one of them and then Mr turner made sure none of the rest sat on my jury” Ronald cotton stated. Because he was black, the four jurors were dismissed and he was left with an all white jury and two white Alternates. Second, the judge “Held something called a “voir dire” hearing, which Phil explained meant he would have to put up all the evidence about Poole in front of the Judge, but not the Jury”(129). Also, Ronald Cotton 's defense attorney explained to the judge the parallelism between Bobby Poole 's case and the rape Ronald Cotton was charged with. Despite the weak physical evidence against Ronald Cotton, the
The objective of this assignment is to bring into being, details and facts involved in a federal case against a fictitious criminal offender, name Mary Cooper.
Wright, Paul. "Prison Legal News - Legal Articles, Cases and Court Decisions." Prison Legal News. Prison Legal News, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. .
from the victim and the scene of the crime be tested and his appeals were denied ("A.B. Butler").
He was not able to show by clear convincing evidence that his pre-trial counsel in the person of Robert Kachinsky had an actual “conflict of interest” nor that the advocacy rendered to him was adversely affected, such that it was detrimental to his case. Dassey was also required to show that he was prejudiced by deficiencies in the performances offered by trial counsel, Attorneys Mark Fremgen and Ray Edelstein. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,687 (1984). The court “strongly presumed” that counsel rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable judgement. Id. At 637 because Dassey failed to sufficiently show otherwise. Based on these circumstances the court concluded that the defendant was not entitled to a new trial or
Lundahl uncovered the victim’s breast from her clothing and put his mouth on them. The defendant told the victim she was “hot” and he wanted to rape her but he did not want to leave his DNA left behind. Mr. Lundahl and the unidentified female threatened to torture the victim in some caves for her bank information until she able to convince them she only had the money they had already taken. Mr. Lundahl exited the residence and moved the victim’s vehicle. When he reentered the house, he was carrying items out of her vehicle. The victim was told not to call police for an hour as they were going to Canada or Mexico. The defendant and the unidentified female left; the victim freed herself and contacted the
Not every break with felony precedent worked against the accused. Occasionally, courts recognized the inherent disadvantage for those charged with piracy, granting limited counsel to defendants, something unheard of in felony proceedings. Courts were usually trying to minimize any post-trial cries of injustice by allowing representation, knowing the courtroom limitations on counsel and the structure of the hearings mitigated the potential risk to convictions. Paul Dudley, Governor of Massachusetts and President of the Court during the John Quelch trial, permitted defendants counsel, declaring before the court “The articles upon which you are Arraigned, are plain Matters of Fact; however, that you may no Reason to complain of Hardship, Mr. James Meinzies, Attorney at Law, may assist you, and offer any Matter of Law in your behalf upon
Radelet, Michael L., Hugo A. Bedau, and Constance E. Putnam. "In Spite of Innocence: Erroneous Convictions in Capital Cases." Google Books. UPNE, 26 May 1994. Web. 02 Dec. 2011. .
As I said in my opening statement, the state has no honest to goodness affirmation to show that my client Mr. Suspect had anything to do with the murder of Biggie Smalls. Their entire case is worked around the statements' of known gang members who themselves had more to get from this murder than my client. Their case was just a single inconsistency after another, held together with misrepresentations and distraction. The direct the truth is there is emphatically no affirmation associating my client to this murder. There is no DNA and no murder weapon, only a myopic examination, which really totals to a witch pursue. Please ladies and gentlemen, prosecuting a legit man won't bring anyone peace, so I ask that you render the primary choice that is defended, not at risk (Mock
Greenfield, D. (2007). Introduction to forensic psychology. issues and controversies in crime and justice. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 35(2), 201-201-204,105-106.
Gary B. Melton, John Petrila, Norman G. Poythress, Psychological Evaluations for the Court: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, Guilford Publications, 3rd edition 2007
Legal Information Institute. (2010, August 9). Retrieved February 17, 2012, from Cornell University Law School: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/criminal_law