So on the Denver criminal defense lawyer blog I've been looking at a variety of burdens of proof. Obviously the most crucial one in the criminal justice system is reasonable doubt. However, I've forgotten another crucial one. The "preponderance of the evidence" generally simply refers to the majority. It means there is a 50.00000000000000001 percent chance that something happened. This is the standard of proof used to determine fault in civil law cases. If you can prove you were harmed by just a bare majority of the evidence, you get damages. In criminal law, obviously the ultimate burden of proof is different. However, the "preponderance" standard still has its place.
For example, there are certain things your Denver criminal defense lawyer can use to help you get acquitted called affirmative defenses. These state that even if the prosecution actually did prove every part of the crime, you should be acquitted anyway. One of these is self defense in murder cases (this is the case in some states, I don't think it is true in every state). That means even if you intentionally kill somebody, and the prosecution can prove you did it, you can still be acquitted if you can prove self-defense. However, the prosecution does not have to prove "no self defense" beyond a reasonable doubt. It is up to you and your Denver criminal defense lawyer to prove that you acted in self-defense. So the absence of any evidence about self defense will mean you get convicted. At the same time, you don't have to prove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Just having a sliver more evidence than the prosecutor will be good enough. So preponderance of the evidence is one example of where a burden of proof that is not beyond a reasonable doubt can be decisive in a criminal case.
Showing posts with label burdens of proof. Show all posts
Showing posts with label burdens of proof. Show all posts
Friday, August 26, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Denver criminal defense lawyer / probable cause
In light of last week's discussion of reasonable doubt, I thought it might be useful to talk about some other burdens of proof. Reasonable doubt is obviously the most important tool for Denver criminal defense lawyers, because it can singlehandedly get the defendant acquitted without anything else. A defendant can simply argue that the prosecution did not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury agrees, the defendant is acquitted. That said there are several other burdens of proof (or levels to which the lawyer must prove his case) that are crucial during a criminal trial.
Probably the most important is probable cause. This is the level of proof the state must meet in proving evidence is admissible. It applies for both out of court testimony and evidence found through searches. This is because the Fourth Amendment requires officers have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and that the search will unveil evidence of the crime (the Constitution doesn't actually say that, but the courts have read that into the amendment). So if your Denver criminal defense attorney can show that either of these things did not happen, the fruits of the search are excluded. That can be so fatal to the prosecution's case the evidence is simply excluded.
In the case of a "seizure" or an arrest, the prosecution has to show that either they had probable cause to believe a felony took place, or that they directly saw a misdemeanor. Either of these is good enough to justify an arrest. If these are not present, any answers you give during interrogation after arrest, or things found during searches at your arrest can't be put into evidence at trial.
So what in the world is probable cause anyway? Basically there is no great way to easily define it. It really is evidence that gives one pretty strong reason to suspect, though that's probably not terribly helpful either. The way lawyers look at it is this: there are a million cases where the Supreme Court and lower courts have looked at evidence and testimony and said "yes" or "no" to the probable cause determination. Your Denver criminal defense attorney knows these cases and can put together the strongest motion possible to exclude the evidence against you.
Probably the most important is probable cause. This is the level of proof the state must meet in proving evidence is admissible. It applies for both out of court testimony and evidence found through searches. This is because the Fourth Amendment requires officers have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and that the search will unveil evidence of the crime (the Constitution doesn't actually say that, but the courts have read that into the amendment). So if your Denver criminal defense attorney can show that either of these things did not happen, the fruits of the search are excluded. That can be so fatal to the prosecution's case the evidence is simply excluded.
In the case of a "seizure" or an arrest, the prosecution has to show that either they had probable cause to believe a felony took place, or that they directly saw a misdemeanor. Either of these is good enough to justify an arrest. If these are not present, any answers you give during interrogation after arrest, or things found during searches at your arrest can't be put into evidence at trial.
So what in the world is probable cause anyway? Basically there is no great way to easily define it. It really is evidence that gives one pretty strong reason to suspect, though that's probably not terribly helpful either. The way lawyers look at it is this: there are a million cases where the Supreme Court and lower courts have looked at evidence and testimony and said "yes" or "no" to the probable cause determination. Your Denver criminal defense attorney knows these cases and can put together the strongest motion possible to exclude the evidence against you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)