Defense attorneys can make a major difference for individuals facing criminal charges. They can educate someone about the penalties that they face and the process that occurs during criminal trials. They can be a calm and rational advocate for someone who likely feels very anxious during their criminal proceedings.
They can also recognize when the state does something illegal or violates the rights of a defendant. There are many rules in place for the protection of those accused of crimes, including rules and standards for criminal evidence. Prosecutors have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant violated specific criminal statutes. They can sometimes convince a judge to exclude certain evidence from a trial.
When investigators have violated a defendant’s rights
There are many rules restricting police searches and interrogations. Officers need to conform with those rules if they hope to gather evidence that can hold up under scrutiny in the criminal courts. When a defense attorney can show that police officers conducted an illegal search or violated someone’s rights during questioning, they can ask a judge to set aside any evidence gained through that misconduct. The exclusionary rule allows for the elimination of evidence secured through misconduct or civil rights violations.
When the state relies on junk science
Certain means of evaluating evidence are more credible than others. There are many forms of evidence that were once common in criminal proceedings but that no longer hold up under scrutiny. So-called junk science ranges from blood spatter analysis to lie detector tests. Occasionally, an attorney can prevent the courts from presenting evidence that relies on scientific conjunction no longer accepted by most experts.
The exclusion of evidence from a trial can lead to dismissed charges or an improved chance of winning in court. Complicated defense strategies that rely on extensive legal and scientific knowledge typically require careful preparation. People facing drug charges and other allegations that rely on questionable evidence could try to prevent the inclusion of that evidence during trial. Those who have the right support when wrongfully accused of breaking the law can improve their chances of convincing the courts that they did not commit a crime.