Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

 

Brady v. Maryland Tag

When Prosecutors Withhold Exculpatory DUI Evidence

When Prosecutors Withhold Exculpatory DUI Evidence

Our criminal justice system is still grappling with the reality that prosecutors and other state employees do withhold exculpatory evidence in DUI and other cases. When defense attorneys learn that evidence has been withheld, they may be able to challenge convictions. In recent news from Massachusetts, staff at a state crime lab routinely withheld exculpatory evidence from DUI defense attorneys for more than five years. The discovery by investigators of unwritten rules to never turn over documents including “evidence that breath testing devices had failed to properly calibrate during the office’s certification process” could provide grounds for appeal in thousands of...

Continue reading

The Duty of Prosecutors to Disclose Exculpatory Evidence

The Duty of Prosecutors to Disclose Exculpatory Evidence

Prosecutors must disclose all exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys in Oklahoma. “Exculpatory” evidence tends to show that the defendant is not guilty or shows that the crime committed is a lesser offense (e.g. manslaughter instead of murder). Both state rules of professional responsibility and a number of Supreme Court cases explain this mandate. Oklahoma Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 3.8(d) states: “A prosecutor shall make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense”. The Code of Professional Responsibility must be followed by...

Continue reading

Is It Legal for the Police to Destroy My Breath Sample?

Is It Legal for the Police to Destroy My Breath Sample?

Charges of driving under the influence implicate legal issues from proper handling of evidence to confessions to warrants. In California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984), the United States Supreme Court considered whether releasing the air from breath samples after analysis violates the accused’s right to examine any potentially exonerating evidence. Trombetta involved several defendants arrested for driving under the influence, taken to a police station, and given breath tests. After they took the breath tests and the police analyzed and recorded the results, the police opened the breathalyzer chamber and purged out the air inside. The same is done for...

Continue reading