Brief filed: 06/15/2010
United States v. MacDonald
4th Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 08-8525
The district court erred when it (1) ignored uncontroverted evidence that the trial AUSA intimidated a defense witness and lied about it to the trial judge, and (2) holding that additional prefiling authorization was required to allow the petitioner to introduce exculpatory DNA evidence. The evidence as a whole establishes that no reasonable fact finder would have found him guilty under 28 U.S.C. §2244(b)(2)(B)(ii) or any other standard.
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
Andrew Good, Philip Cormier and Harvey Silverglate, Goodwin Proctor LLP, Boston, MA, et al. 4th Circuit Decision 04/19/2011.