Denver criminal defense lawyer / affirmative defenses

On the Denver criminal defense lawyer blog, I've already talked some about burdens of proof for different things in a criminal case. The most important one is obviously reasonable doubt which is the standard the state must prove a defendant's guilt beyond, but beyond that there are a number of others. The primary one is that a defendant must prove any affirmative defenses himself. Generally those must be proved by the preponderance of the evidence. That means your Denver criminal defense lawyer has to martial evidence so that the jury or judge in the case believes it's more likely than not the facts asserted happened. There are two major affirmative defenses I'll address here. The first is the alibi. In the case of an alibi, the burden is on the defendant to prove that he was not there. This makes sense to an extent. The prosecutor should not be asked to disprove the fact that someone was somewhere else, especially if they've already made the defendant's presence at the crime scene part of the case.

To make things more difficult for defendants and Denver criminal defense lawyers, the defendant must also provide notice of his intention to use the alibi defense. Again this makes a certain amount of sense since it really is the defendant putting the system on its head by creating a case of his own instead of just popping holes in the prosecution's case. However, it does deprive the defendant of a crucial tool that he's able to use in almost every other situation: the element of surprise. Instead of being able to ambush the state's witnesses with new information, the defendant has to open himself up to full investigation and possible manipulation of the witnesses who will be specifically on notice to disprove the alibi defense before it is even brought up. So though it makes some sense in terms of being fair to the state, the element of surprise at trial can be a key tool of other parts of the case and it might be asked why you're not allowed to use it here.

Denver criminal defense lawyer / how change happens

Here is an encouraging story about reduction in drug possession penalties being proposed in Colorado. It is also fairly instructive of what it takes to get the laws changed.

Republican Sen. Shawn Mitchell, one of the lawmakers leading the way on the legislation, has spoken publicly about the toll meth addiction has taken on his younger brother and said he wants a more sensible approach against drugs. He said his brother is "on a strong path to recovery."

"The war on drugs has made government more powerful, citizens less free, and hasn't helped users or addicts," Mitchell said. "I want to push a smarter effort against drugs. I want to stop piling people into prisons and stop branding people with a felony for a personal weakness."

Mitchell said he questioned the government's handling of drug crimes even before his experience with his brother.

As you can probably tell from this Denver criminal defense lawyer blog, I have a number of issues with the way the system is set up. From the ability of people to get things sealed from their record, to unclarity in the criminal code, there are a variety of issues that really need to be addressed. Unfortunately the only real way this ever happens is when someone in a position of power is personally touched by the issue. That's why we get huge congressional inquiries into white collar crime where the middle class is defrauded, but there is never any real concern about the brutal costs of prison on the less fortunate. Unfortunately there isn't much to be done here, except to get the less fortunate to be more involved in decision making. Of course one gigantic group of the less fortunate (felons) can't even vote! Ever in their lives! So it's up to Denver defense lawyers and also those that care about these issues despite not being directly affected to be active on behalf of those without a voice.

Denver criminal defense lawyer / co-defendants

Although it's not particularly common in the DUI and run-of the mill general cases I accept normally as a Denver criminal defense lawyer, co-defendants are fairly common in larger and more complex Colorado criminal cases. And they bring up a number of interesting issues. A big one, which I'll cover here, is a serious issue of attorney ethics. If you and a friend are charged with say conspiracy to distribute drugs, the prosecutor may charge the two of you together. He may bring the same evidence and the same charges against both of you. It may sound like a good idea to share a lawyer (or a couple lawyers, if it took a whole crew to distribute the drugs, it might take more than one Denver criminal defense lawyer to help you out). That will save you money, and keep you on the same side for the moment.

The problem is when there is a situation where the attorney must sort of choose sides. What if it comes out that one defendant is believed to be more culpable by the prosecution? The prosecution would then probably seek the testimony of the other defendant, in exchange for possibly a sweetheart deal. At that point, how does the attorney provide competent representation to both parties? He knows that if he advises the second defendant to take the plea, he will be screwing over the first defendant. But on the other hand he also has an obligation to make sure the second defendant gets the best outcome in this case. The attorney may even question if he can continue representing either party, since he will have information from both given to him in confidence. The conclusion is, your friends may not stay your friends if you are charged with a crime. Also, please hire your own lawyer, don't split one with a friend.