Renewed War on Drugs, harsher charging policies, stepped-up criminalization of immigrants — in the current climate, joining the NACDL is more important than ever. Members of NACDL help to support the only national organization working at all levels of government to ensure that the voice of the defense bar is heard.
Take a stand for a fair, rational, and humane criminal legal system
Contact members of congress, sign petitions, and more
Help us continue our fight by donating to NFCJ
Help shape the future of the association
Join the dedicated and passionate team at NACDL
Increase brand exposure while building trust and credibility
NACDL is committed to enhancing the capacity of the criminal defense bar to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights.
NACDL harnesses the unique perspectives of NACDL members to advocate for policy and practice improvements in the criminal legal system.
NACDL envisions a society where all individuals receive fair, rational, and humane treatment within the criminal legal system.
NACDL’s mission is to serve as a leader, alongside diverse coalitions, in identifying and reforming flaws and inequities in the criminal legal system, and redressing systemic racism, and ensuring that its members and others in the criminal defense bar are fully equipped to serve all accused persons at the highest level.
Showing 1 - 15 of 20 results
NACDL advocated for legislation to increase police transparency and accountability and to prevent excessive force.
20th Annual State Criminal Justice Network Conference August 18-20, 2021 | Held Virtually
Police departments across the country are increasing using predictive algorithms to decide where to patrol and who to investigate. These tools are also being used to create databases that label people as threats and feed them into the criminal legal system.
This panel highlights policing reforms adopted over the last year and what still needs to be done.
NACDL's 19th Annual State Criminal Justice Network Conference August 17-19, 2020 | Held Virtually Policing in America: Policing the Police
Policies and rulings on lengthy imprisonment terms in Colorado.
Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss.
Argument: It is axiomatic that due process principles restrict criminal liability to violations of laws of which the accused has fair notice. Criminal liability may not attach to conduct that is beyond the scope of an unambiguous criminal proscription— and all close calls must be resolved in favor of the defendant. Where a criminal violation is not supported by clear, existing authority—or where it is even a close question—the reviewing court should dismiss the criminal indictment under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(B)(v). Doing so ensures fairness by avoiding the grave harms associated with criminal prosecution—which frequently cannot be remedied by eventual reversal on appeal—while preserving the Department’s ability to pursue the prosecution if a reviewing court sees the law differently. These principles strongly support dismissal of the indictment here. Existing authority does not support criminal liability on the basis of a no-solicitation agreement, which no court has ever held to be a per se violation of the Sherman Act. Allowing the prosecution to proceed in these circumstances would be inconsistent with existing law and the Department’s own policy statements—and would thus violate due process.
NACDL's work on pretrial advocacy in Colorado induding the publication of the Colorado Bail Manual. [Released September 2015]
See the various issues on which NACDL has conducted criminal justice advocacy in Colorado. Scroll to the bottom of the page to see active legislation in Colorado that NACDL is tracking.
Information on the policy and history of recording custodial interrogations in Colorado.
Attorney-client communications federal caselaw and state-specific anecdotal data in Colorado
NACDL issued a groundbreaking new report on restoring and reforming the grand jury system. This research reflects an in-depth study of grand jury reform in two states – New York and Colorado – and produces with four reform recommendations. [Released November 2011]
Brief of Amici Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense Bar and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in support of Defendant-Petitioner.
Argument: Mr. Lucas is held in a county jail without bail pending trial on a charge of first degree murder. In this original proceeding, the Colorado Supreme Court will determine whether the trial erred in denying Mr. Lucas’ motion to require the sheriff to keep professional consultation visits confidential. The Sheriff has a policy to inform the district attorney of the professional consultation visits received by Mr. Lucas. The amicus brief argues that the right to prepare a defense in secret is a necessary corollary to a defendant’s constitutional rights to due process, equal protection, and the effective assistance of counsel. When the prosecution prematurely learns the identity of consulting defense experts, the prosecution gains an unfair advantage in trial preparation, rendering the trial fundamentally unfair. The Sheriff can only provide this information when the defendant is incarcerated pretrial, denying equal protection to indigent and otherwise non-bondable defendants. An express recognition that defendants must be granted a fair opportunity to prepare their defense with sufficient secrecy to protect their pretrial strategy from disclosure is consistent with reciprocal discovery rules which require disclose of defense experts only if they will be called as trial witnesses and with the attorney work-product doctrine. Defense lawyers will also be rendered constitutionally ineffective if forced to alter strategies for consulting with experts solely because a defendant is jailed pretrial.
Presented by: Daniel Zettler, public defender, Salida, CO; Elsa Archambault, public defender, Centennial, CO; Justin Bogan, public defender, Durango, CO; and Sheryl Uhlmann, public defender, Steamboat Springs, CO
Presented by: Chris Bowman, public defender, Grand Junction, CO; and Steven Colvin, public defender, Denver, CO
In the instant case, the lack of a causal link between the defendant's actions and murder committed by third-party after defendant was already in police custody does not support felony murder conviction; causation must be an element of proof for felony murder because it restricts the reach of the felony murder rule to those cases where defendant's liability is consistent with established principles of criminal responsibility.