NACDL is pleased to submit our comments with respect to the proposed changes to Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1). … Our members have substantial experience with the challenges created by Rule 609 and have submitted amicus briefs before the Oregon Supreme Court and Supreme Court of the State of Washington related to the state counterparts of Rule 609’s impact on the people in each jurisdiction. In line with our dedication to advancing the proper, efficient, and just administration of justice, we would like to offer the following comments on the proposed change to Rule 609(a)(1).

Although the rationale for impeaching with prior convictions is to shed light on an individual’s “propensity for truthfulness,” prior convictions have no connection to truthfulness or untruthfulness. Instead, this practice provides leverage for prosecutors because it deters vital witness testimony. How can defense attorneys push back against the practice of prior conviction impeachment right now?

White collar cases are complex, and the clients in these cases are often part of society’s higher social strata. From “being bold” at the first meeting with the client to dealing with the client’s desire to talk to the press, veteran defense attorney Jim Brosnahan offers 10 tips that will make a white collar representation smoother.

The Jencks Act allows the prosecution to withhold witness statements until after the witness testifies on direct examination. The timing of production and the procedural mechanisms provided by the Jencks Act are outdated, Daniel Gelb writes, particularly when a witness’s previously recorded statement references material in social media messages and text messages.

Comments to the Judicial Conference of the United States Practice & Procedure Committee regarding proposed amendments to Federal Rules of Evidence 106, 615, and 702.

This month Jon M. Sands reviews Old Thiess, a Livonian Werewolf: A Classic Case in Comparative Perspective by Carlo Ginsburg and Bruce Lincoln.

Informers are government witnesses, and their testimony is untrustworthy due to their self-interested motives. Though it is common for pattern jury instruction to include some note of caution about informers’ testimony, no instruction sufficiently alerts the jury to the incentives informers are given to lie. How can counsel fight against cooperation agreement provisions that prejudice the defendant? 

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence.

Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure regarding proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Federal Rules of Evidence.

Presented by Eric Davis, Assistant Public Defender, Chief of Felony Trial Division, Harris County Public Defender (TX); and Karen Smolar, Trial Chief, Bronx Defenders

Advanced Skills in Sexual Assault Defense
Indianapolis, IN | 2018 | Grant-Funded Public Defense Training

Prosecutorial misconduct leads to vacated convictions and dismissed charges.

Defendant sought new trial or an order vacating convictions and dismissing the charges with prejudice on the basis that the prosecutor interfered with a defense witness's decision to testify. The Court grants Defendant's motion and vacates the convictions. 

The president and members of Congress have started to criticize the use of cooperating witnesses. Defense lawyers have an opportunity to identify skeptical jurors who do not believe anything that cooperating witnesses say and to mount attacks on these witnesses in every case.