Brief filed: 12/08/2016
In the Matter of Kaden J.M. (anonymous)
New York Supreme Court Appellate Division; Case No. 2016-02399
Case below Family Court, Kings County Docket Nos. N-2583-16 & N-2584-16.
To effectively represent clients in two forums based on the same underlying allegations – such as parallel criminal and Family Court proceedings – it is necessary to obtain and assess information related to those allegations in the context of both proceedings, and to be able to share it with qualified co-counsel. The restraints placed on appellant's criminal defense attorney deprives appellant of her constitutional right to effective counsel. The non-disclosure order renders appellant's criminal defender incapable of providing effective representation. Effective representation requires attorneys to consider estoppel issues in parallel proceedings. Criminal attorneys cannot effectively counsel clients regarding the right against self-incriminations without unfettered access to information in parallel proceedings. The non-disclosure order impairs adequacy of counsel by prohibiting communication between appellant's two assigned attorneys. The non-disclosure order denies appellant her fundamental right to counsel due purely to her indigence.
Pattern Cross-Examination of Expert Witnesses: A Trial Strategy & Resource Guide
In a criminal trial, cross-examination of the prosecution’s forensic expert may make the difference between victory or defeat.
2020 Sample Motions Collection Update
NACDL’s 2020 Sample Motions Collection is the follow-up to our wildly popular 2019 Sample Motions Collection and contains the newest and most recent additions to our ever-expanding Sample Motions library.
State v. Stone - A Case Study on Child Sexual Molestation & Sexual Battery
The criminal defense attorney tasked with defending such a case has to be prepared to not only show reasonable doubt, but to answer this question: If it did not happen, how is it that the child believes it did happen?
POZNER ON CROSS: Advanced Cross of Experts & Officers in DUI Cases
It’s not your strong opening argument. It’s not how many of your impassioned objections the judge sustains. It’s not even how you tie your theory of the case together with a dazzling closing statement bow. What wins your trial is your cross.
This is a sponsored ad
Manage Your Law Firm All in One Place
Barry A. Bohrer & Abigail F. Coster, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, New York, NY; Richard D. Willstatter, White Plains, NY; Brendan White, NYSACDL, New York, NY.