Showing 1 - 4 of 4 results
Letter to Congress Outlining 6 Principles for Cybersecurity Legislation (April 2012)
... NACDL urges you to oppose any legislation that attempts to enhance our security by rendering our Fourth Amendment rights less secure. There are real cybersecurity threats before us, but they do not pose risks so great that we should cross all boundaries of constitutional restraint to seek protection from them. NACDL supports six principles that cybersecurity legislation should embrace to successfully enhance our security interests and protect the Fourth Amendment, and encourages you to amend or oppose any legislation that does not abide by these principles.
Bellamy v. City of New York
Brief for Amici Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Innocence Network, and Innocence Project in Support of Appellant and Reversal.
Argument: The district court's decision unfairly deprives wrongfully convicted individuals of the opportunity to pursue much-needed compensation and improperly immunizes municipalities for district attorneys' misconduct. The district court's decision ignores New York State policy to deter municipalities from violating criminal defendants' constitutional rights.
United States v. Quinn
Brief on rehearing en banc for Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in support of appellant.
Argument: The district court’s denial of Appellant’s motion to compel the testimony of co-defendant, which if granted could have conferred judicial immunity for that testimony was reversible error. “Government speculation that a witness might commit perjury cannot override the defendant’s constitutional right of access to evidence that could contribute to the establishment of reasonable doubt.” (Br. at 3-11.) “In reaffirming the defendant’s right to compel witness testimony, the court should make clear that ‘exculpatory and essential’ evidence is evidence that could contribute substantially to raising a reasonable doubt.” (Br. at 11-15.)