Brief filed: 08/14/2017
United States v. Nicholas
3rd Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 16-4410
On appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Honorable Harvey Bartle III.
The removal of juror 12 violated the fundamental rights to trial by jury and to a unanimous verdict. The applicable legal principles: The "No Reasonable Possibility" standard. The district court violated defendant's rights under the Sixth Amendment and Fed. R. Crim. P. 31(a). The district court should have refused to send the speaking indictment to the jury during deliberations.
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
John D. Cline, Law Office of John D. Cline, San Francisco, CA; Alan Silber, Pashman Stein Walder Hayden, P.C., Hackensack, NJ.