There are many different criminal defense strategies that people can develop before going to trial. Some people establish an alibi or present the courts with a credible alternate suspect. Others might raise an affirmative defense by showing that unusual circumstances mitigate their criminal culpability.
Defense attorneys can also sometimes prevent the prosecutor from using certain evidence. Successful suppression of evidence can increase the likelihood of an acquittal or might even result in the dismissal of pending charges.
How do criminal defense attorneys work challenge the state’s evidence before a case goes to trial?
By highlighting misconduct or civil rights violations
People interacting with police officers or taken into state custody have certain rights. Police officers generally need to ensure that they uphold the rights of suspects during searches and questioning. Officers also have to avoid directly violating the law.
If a defense attorney can convince the courts that police officers broke the law or violated a defendant’s civil rights to collect evidence, it may be possible to exclude that evidence from criminal proceedings. The exclusionary rule allows for the elimination of ill-gotten evidence, which some people call the fruit of the poisonous tree.
Given that the Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches, any improper searches by police officers or other agents of the state could constitute a significant violation of a defendant’s Constitutional rights. Those errors by law enforcement can eventually work in favor of the defendant.
Discussing the behavior of law enforcement professionals with a skilled legal team could help people evaluate different criminal defense strategies. If an attorney can prevent the state from using key evidence, then the chances of avoiding a conviction may noticeably increase.
