Facing criminal charges is a frightening and often unexpected experience. Someone accused of breaking the law may worry about statements that they made to the police or misinterpreted evidence gathered during traffic stop.
Typically, prosecutors only bring charges in cases where they believe they have adequate evidence to secure convictions. Many people then rush to the conclusion that they cannot prevail in court if they go to trial. They may plead guilty even while maintaining that they are actually innocent.
Those who hope to obtain the best possible outcome when accused of breaking the law often need the guidance and advocacy of a criminal defense attorney. One of the ways lawyers can help their clients is by preventing prosecutors from presenting certain evidence during a criminal trial. When can lawyers challenge the inclusion of certain evidence?
When the state violated someone’s rights
There are very clear rules limiting how police officers interact with members of the public. There are rules about when officers can perform certain types of searches. There are also certain standards they need to conform to when questioning criminal defendants.
If a defense attorney can prove that police officers broke the law or violated someone’s rights, they can use that misconduct to their advantage during criminal proceedings. The exclusionary rule allows an attorney to challenge the inclusion of illegally-obtained evidence during criminal proceedings.
In some cases, the exclusionary rule could lead to the dismissal of pending charges. If a traffic stop was illegal, a lawyer might be able to prevent the prosecution from presenting chemical test results and other evidence gathered during that traffic stop.
When the evidence is of questionable quality
Perhaps a review of the state’s evidence using discovery rights shows a major gap in the chain of custody. There could be reason to worry about contamination from outside sources and therefore inaccurate test results. Other times, the state’s evidence might rely on junk science. If blood spatter analysis or 911-call analysis is key to the state’s claims against a defendant, their lawyer may be able to convince the courts to exclude that evidence.
By bringing in expert witnesses who can prove that the evidence does not conform to current legal or scientific standards, lawyers can potentially keep certain information out of court or discredit it during a criminal trial. Just because prosecutors have some evidence does not necessarily mean they can secure a criminal conviction.
Reviewing the evidence the state intends to use with a skilled legal team can help defendants start planning a criminal defense strategy. Reaching out to the team at the Kollin Firm could benefit someone eager to avoid a conviction plan an appropriate response to pending charges.