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 - 14 of 14 results
This training program will aid those working to defend persons accused of homicide in drug-related overdose deaths. Each section of the program focuses on a different aspect of these cases. CLE is not available for this program.
On November 6, 2019, funded by a grant from Vital Strategies, NACDL hosted Defending Drug Overdose Homicides in Pennsylvania. This day-long program featured local and national speakers sharing insights and understandings regarding the complexities of drug overdose homicide prosecutions.
NACDL is providing resources regarding the Criminalization of Pregnancy and Reproductive Health to the criminal defense community. Resources are provided without warranty or guarantee. Please consult the laws and rules of your state and local authorities. Please log in to access them. Membership is NOT required.
Pennsylvania does not currently have a pre-Roe abortion ban or “trigger” law on the books.
See the various issues on which NACDL has conducted criminal justice advocacy in Pennsylvania. Scroll to the bottom of the page to see active legislation in Pennsylvania that NACDL is tracking.
NACDL worked with state partners to advance clean slate legislation in Pennsylvania.
Policies and rulings on lengthy imprisonment terms in Pennsylvania.
Brief for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees.
Argument: The right “to reasonable and timely notice of and to be present at all public proceedings involving the criminal or delinquent conduct” has impaired the administration of justice and cost counties and states millions of dollars. The right “to reasonable protection from the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused” has led to absurd results in pretrial release decisions. The codification of “respect for the victim’s . . . privacy” and the right “to reasonable protection from the accused” has made it more difficult for law enforcement to solve crime and left the public lacking critical information about criminal activity.
Information on the policy and history of recording custodial interrogations in Pennsylvania.
Attorney-client communications federal caselaw and state-specific anecdotal data in Pennsylvania
Brief for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners.
Argument: The dramatic impact that Marsy’s Law would have on Pennsylvania’s criminal justice system is not mere speculation. Other states have adopted nearly identically vague and broad constitutional amendments, which have resulted in substantial harm not only to criminal defendants, but also to the administration of the criminal justice system. This amicus brief summarizes the substantial burdens that Marsy’s Law has imposed in other states where it has gone into effect. The right “to reasonable and timely notice of and to be present at all public proceedings involving the criminal or delinquent conduct” has cost counties and states millions of dollars and congested court dockets. Marsy’s Law states have struggled to deal with the financial impact of the notice provision. The docket congestion caused by the notice provision has caused intolerable delays in proceedings. The right “to reasonable protection from the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused” has led to absurd results in pretrial release decisions. The right to “full and timely restitution” will take money from the courts. The codification of “respect for the victim’s…privacy” and the right “to reasonable protection from the accused” has made it more difficult for law enforcement to solve crimes and left the public lacking critical information about criminal activity.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Foley
Argument: The Superior Court, No. 2039 WDA 2009,Panella, J., held that: (1) proposed testimony about alleged intimate acts between victim and his next-door neighbor, as offered to show a possible motive for neighbor's husband to kill victim, was irrelevant in absence of evidence that neighbor's husband knew of the supposed intimate acts; (2) there was no legitimate dispute over reliability of state expert's DNA testimony that was based on analysis by his propriety software, and, therefore, that testimony was not novel and did not have to pass Frye test for novel scientific evidence; (3) relevant, though inconclusive, evidence that bloody footprints found at crime scene were left by a particular brand, model, and size of running shoe was admissible to support inference that defendant was at crime scene; (4) trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that jury verdict was not against manifest weight of evidence; and (5) a jury finding that defendant intentionally used a deadly weapon on a vital part of victim's body could be regarded as an item of circumstantial evidence from which jury could infer that the defendant acted with malice.
In The Court of Common Pleas, Indiana County, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania v. Foley; Opinion and Order of Court
Brief Amicus Curiae of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Appellants.
Argument: Appellants have stated a claim for constructive denial of counsel because the allegations of the amendment complaint demonstrate that there are systemic deficiencies in the Luzerne County office of the Public Defender that create an imminent and unacceptable risk that appellants’ right to counsel will be violated in ways that cannot be cured by post-conviction review. The amended complaint describes systemic violations of Kuren’s and Allabaugh’s right to counsel under the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions. Violations of the right to effective assistance of counsel at critical stages of the adversarial process prior to trial cannot be remedied by post-conviction review, making prospective injunctive relief appropriate. The problems confronting indigent defense services are systemic and extend throughout the commonwealth and the nation.