Feb 16, 2016 · Cross-Examination of a Police Officer. In California, if you are arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), then you have the chance to take your case to trial and defend yourself. During that time, the prosecutors and your DUI defense attorney will cross-examine the police officer who arrested you.
Cross-Examination of a Police Officer Call for Skilled Cross Examination Techniques - (303) 720-7280. A DUI trial is a major legal event, and it should never be considered to be minor. If convicted, it will remain on your Colorado driving record for the rest of your life.
Oct 06, 2018 · The purpose of a cross-examination is to point out flaws in the testimony of an adverse witness and to discredit the witness in the eyes of the jury. There are two primary rules for cross-examination: the lawyer should (1) only ask leading questions, and (2) never ask a question that the lawyer doesn’t know the answer to.
Mar 19, 2022 · DUI defense lawyer Larry Forman cross-examines a cop who admits the client did not commit any traffic violations and did not show any signs of impairment other than slurred speech, the smell of alcohol, and slow reaction speed. Cop had no video available (so they claimed). The judge did not allow me to move the podium, so I had to improvise.
Cross-examining the arresting officer on the subject of the Roadside sobriety tasks is a combination of your own familiarity with the tasks themselves and having the authoritative materials available at your fingertips. These tasks or tests, the courts have declared that they should only be referred to as tasks in or-der not to give them some undue significance, really have nothing to do with a person's normal faculties. They really are nothing more than parlor tricks.
Section 90.706 of the Florida Evidence Code permits use of authoritative sources in cross-examination. Even it the officer doesn't recognize it as an authoritative source the Court can find the ma-terial to be authoritative and relevant to the subject matter. Most police officers will testify to some additional training through IPTM, especially if they are on any kind of DUI task force. Basically you will be using their own textbook to impeach them or at least raise a reasonable doubt. Since the Student Manual and the Screening Procedures were published by the federal and state The key theory behind SFST is the concept of divided attention: to concentrate on two things at once. Even before governments respectively the Court should recognize them as authoritative.
The area of impeachment by omission plays an important part after the vehicle is stopped. Even before you get to the roadside sobriety tasks you must deal with the first direct contact between the defendant and the arresting officer. Again you want to break it down to the smallest possible details and pull out from those include that information in his report than impeach by omission. This information was obviously important and material enough for the jury to be told. When the officer gave your client directions and they were followed point it out.
Not every case can be won and not every case should be tried. However, they can't be won at all if you don't try them and you need to; be prepared to dance. Good luck and don't let the ball fall off your nose. Gregg Lerman is a board certified criminal trial lawyer in West Palm Beach.
With a DUI case, each detail in the arresting officer's statement is important in some way and may sway a jury. Knowledge of the facts about the incident itself, the conditions of the area at the time of the arrest, and the client are very important, thus it's important for criminal defense lawyers to never ask a question they don't already know the answer to and ask leading questions.
As DUI lawyers, we cannot underestimate the value of cross-examination during a criminal trial. Never was this truer than in DUI cases where scientific and technical evidence is a central issue for the jury. That being said, prosecutors often feel uncomfortable during cross-examination and not because of lack of ability, but due to insufficient practice, focus, or preparation for this aspect of trial.
How does a DUI lawyer handle a case when it comes time for cross-examination? As previously discussed, police officers will not show the same level of nervousness as other witnesses when questioned by both prosecutors and defense teams.
This is one of the reasons it is crucial that you have an attorney who is not only knowledgeable but also aggressive and is skilled with the courtroom. At The Law Offices of Robert F. Sommers, our Ventura DUI lawyer is a former prosecutor and knows how both sides of the courtroom operate.
A DUI trial is a major legal event, and it should never be considered to be minor. If convicted, it will remain on your Colorado driving record for the rest of your life.
Remember, you don't need to prove your innocence. You only need to put enough holes in the case against you - the burden of proof lies with the prosecutor. But if you don't hire an attorney with extensive experience in DUI cases and police cross-examination techniques, you may not be able to take advantage of any weakness es in police procedures and the evidence against you.
The purpose of a cross-examination is to point out flaws in the testimony of an adverse witness and to discredit the witness in the eyes of the jury. There are two primary rules for cross-examination: the lawyer should (1) only ask leading questions, and (2) never ask a question that the lawyer doesn’t know the answer to.
Open-ended questions can be dangerous because witnesses are then allowed to testify to something that the lawyer may be unaware of and that may be harmful to the lawyer’s case. Anyway, here are the questions and answers to part of my cross-examination of the investigating officer in the Jones case:
A leading question is a question that is framed in a way that suggests the answer that the lawyer wants to obtain from the witness. A leading question is ordinarily structured so that only a yes or no answer is required. This allows the attorney to exercise control over the witness.
A: No. Q: That’s all I have, your honor. At the moment of your death, in a flash, your entire life — everything that you ever did — will instantly be revealed to you. You will be overwhelmed, in part, because you will feel as though you’ve been cross-examined by Almighty God.
Summary :Defense counsel James G. Connell conducts a thorough cross-examination of a government cooperating witness in a federal drug conspiracy case. As is often the case with federal prosecutions, the Government relies primarily on testimony from former co-defendants or associates of the accused who are being offered sunstantial leniency in exchange for testifying against the defendant. Of note, is is often the case, is that the government cooperator does not want to admit that is being virtually guaranteed leniency, or that it matters to him if the accused is convicted. He essentially pretends to believe that he has no idea what sentence he will receive. The cross examination exposes, as much as possible, the fact that the government cooperator actually knows he will be heavily rewarded by the prosecutors for helping them to secure a conviction.
Summary: The Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney conducts a direct examination of a police detective (at a preliminary hearing, not a trial), qualifying him, without objection, as an expert in “gang activities” specifically in “MS-13 activity in Northern Virginia”.
The qualification section of the direct is minimal, most likely because it was conducted only to establish probable cause, and not at a jury trial. Of note is that the testimony is not of a scientific or forensic nature, but based on the detective’s hand-on experience in working gang cases.
The scientist discusses how cartridges are compared with known samples fired from a gun, and how a comparison between samples of known and unknown origin can yield the opinion that a particular cartridge was indeed fired from a particular gun.
Summary :This transcript is a direct and cross examination of an alleged rape victim. It is not a trial transcript, but a pre-trial hearing. Therefore, the questioning is not as confined as it might be at a trial. The alleged victim met the two defendants at a Washington, DC nightclub.
In the case, the crime scene specialist is not a sworn police officer.
While there is a substantial literature arguing that conclusive fingerprint match es are wholly unscientific, such testimo ny is so historically accepted it is generally admissible. Sample Cross-Examination of Fingerprint Expert.
The other two standardized field sobriety tests are: the horizontal gaze nystagmus test ( HGN) and. the walk and turn test. These three tests are considered “standardized” as a result of several scientific studies establishing with statistical significance the correlation between the three tests and DUI impairment. 9.
Colorado concealed carry reciprocity – 3 things to know. The walk and turn test is also sometimes referred to as the nine-step test, nine step walk turn, DUI straight line test, or DUI walk the line test The walk and turn test is a standardized field sobriety test (FST) that police frequently administer in order to detect whether ...
The walk and turn test is a standardized field sobriety test (FST) that police frequently administer in order to detect whether a DUI suspect is under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. 1. The test is also sometimes referred to as the nine-step test, nine step walk turn, DUI straight line test, or DUI walk the line test.
According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), studies have revealed the walk and turn test to be 68% accurate in determining whether a driver has a blood alcohol concentration of 10. or greater. 5.
There should be sufficient room for the suspect to complete nine heel-to-toe steps.