Articles Posted in Evidence

Recently, following the eighteen year anniversary of 9/11, the United States Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs issued a press release regarding the sentencing of a resident of North Texas to 240 months’ imprisonment in a federal penitentiary for conspiring to provide support to a terrorist organization overseas. The defendant’s arrest and conviction demonstrate the FBI’s continued efforts to combat terrorism domestically and abroad. If you are a Texas resident charged with conspiracy or any other crime it is in your best interest to meet with a skillful Texas criminal defense attorney to discuss your case and what defenses you may be able to set forth.

The Investigation and the Defendant’s Arrest

Reportedly, the defendant, who is 18 years old, was arrested and charged with conspiring to prove material support to LeT, a foreign terrorist organization based out of Pakistan, following an extensive investigation by the FBI. The defendant pleaded guilty as charged. Specifically, he admitted he communicated with his co-conspirator online, encouraging the co-conspirator to join  LeT and providing him with contact information of a facilitator who could help the individual travel to Pakistan to join LeT. The defendant then contacted the facilitator, who was an undercover FBI agent, to advise that he would kill the co-conspirator if he was a spy. The defendant also stated that he would recruit additional fighters for LeT, and made arrangements with the facilitator to go to Pakistan and join LeT.

The Defendant’s Sentencing

It is alleged that during the defendant’s sentencing hearing, the FBI presented evidence that the defendant’s recent acts were consistent with a pattern of ongoing behavior. For example, the defendant repeatedly posted online statements in support of violent extremism. He also made several posts threatening to harm people who opposed his extreme beliefs and searched the internet for methods of carrying out such attacks.

Continue reading →

When a person is accused of a crime, he or she has the constitutional right to confront any witnesses relied upon by the prosecution. If the prosecution is permitted to rely upon testimony from witnesses the defendant has not had a chance to cross-examine, it may constitute a violation of the defendant’s rights and any conviction based on that testimony may be unjust. In a recent case decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the court ruled that a defendant’s right to confront witnesses was violated by testimony from a police officer regarding information about a drug transaction involving the defendant that was provided by a confidential informant. If you are charged with drug trafficking or any other crime it is critical to retain a seasoned Texas drug crime defense attorney to assist you in presenting a vigilant defense.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Background

Reportedly, the defendant was arrested following an investigation regarding methamphetamine trafficking. Specifically, the police received a confidential tip that a drug transaction was going to take place in a parking lot. A surveillance team monitored the lot and observed the defendant pull up next to another person in a different vehicle, after which the two vehicles drove off together. An officer observed the drivers of the two vehicles meeting briefly, then driving off separately. The police began following the defendant, and after he committed a traffic violation, attempted to stop him.

It is alleged that the defendant sped up and drove away, temporarily evading arrest. The police searched the area and found a gun and a bag of methamphetamines on the side of the road. The defendant was charged with possession of methamphetamines with the intent to distribute. During the trial, the arresting officer testified that he did not actually see a drug deal happen between the defendant and the other driver. The officer then stated, however, that after the alleged drug transaction he called his confidential source, who confirmed that the transaction occurred. The defendant was convicted. He appealed, arguing in part that the officer’s testimony regarding his confidential source violated his rights pursuant to the Confrontation Clause.

Continue reading →

If you are involved in an accident while you are intoxicated, it can result in serious charges with significant penalties. This was demonstrated by the recent arrest of a UFC fighter who was charged with 20 crimes following a DUI related accident in which two people lost their lives. If you are charged with multiple DUI crimes following an accident you should speak with an experienced Texas DUI defense attorney regarding your available defenses.

Facts Regarding the Alleged Incident

Allegedly, the fighter was involved in a car accident in August of 2018 that caused the death of two women. The accident occurred in the early morning of August 18, 2018, on a freeway in Florida. It is alleged that the fighter veered his SUV into the path of a tractor trailer, hitting the tire of the tractor trailer and setting off a chain reaction that lead to an accident involving three other cars. The fighter then struck a guard rail which caused his SUV to propel into the path of a car, causing the car to hit the guard rail and flip over. Two of the passengers in the car were killed and the driver sustained serious injuries. The fighter and another driver were treating for injuries as well.

It is reported that immediately after the accident, a witness observed the driver throwing an object over a concrete barrier. When the police investigated the accident, they collected the object, which was a tool used to grind marijuana. The police also spoke to the fighter, who appeared to be intoxicated. Specifically, his speech was slurred, and he had an odor of alcohol. The police also noted a bag of white powder on the passenger seat of the fighter’s SUV, which was later determined to be cocaine. The police reportedly obtained samples of the fighter’s blood from the airbag and interior of his car.

Continue reading →

During criminal trials in Texas, it is not uncommon for either party to use demonstrative evidence such as video or audio recordings, or charts or drawings, to make issues clearer for the jury and to help the jury understand the evidence. The jury is still required to determine whether a defendant is guilty based on the factual evidence presented, however. Thus, if the State presents demonstrative evidence that induces the jury to come to a decision based on matters not in evidence, it can result in an unfair verdict. A Texas appellate court recently analyzed when demonstrative evidence goes too far, in a case in which the State showed a video of a lion at the zoo trying to eat a baby during a robbery trial. If you are currently charged with robbery or any other crime it is essential to retain a knowledgeable Texas criminal defense attorney to defend you against the charges you face in hopes of allowing you to retain your rights.

The Alleged Robbery and Subsequent Trial

Allegedly, in 2015, the defendant entered a convenience store and when no one else was around went up to the cashier and stated it was a “stick up” and that he had a weapon. He never showed the cashier a weapon, however. He then demanded money from the cashier and took food and beverages as well before walking out. He was apprehended a short time later with the items and money he stole in a backpack. He did not have any weapons when he was stopped. He was subsequently charged with robbery.

It is reported that during the punishment phase at trial, the State showed a video of a lion behind glass at the zoo appearing to attempt to eat a baby. Defense counsel objected to the use of the video, but the objection was overruled. The State then likened the defendant to the lion, suggesting he posed a threat outside of jail and should receive an enhanced sentence. The defendant was subsequently sentenced to 50 years in prison, after which he appealed.
Continue reading →

Read Original story HERE.

A Wisconsin DUI case in which police officers ordered the blood of an unconscious man be drawn for evidence without first getting a warrant was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Prosecutors argued that drawing the blood of unconscious drivers helps convict those who kill thousands of people a year in alcohol-related car accidents, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. They said the process of getting a warrant is too inconvenient and that Wisconsin’s implied consent law does not require officers to get a warrant before drawing the blood of those suspected of driving while intoxicated, including individuals who are unconscious at the time.

Under Texas law, if the evidence is insufficient to convict a defendant of a crime, he or she may be convicted of a lesser included offense. In some cases, a defendant may choose to enter into a plea bargain to a lesser included offense to avoid a possible conviction for the greater offense. Typically, either the State or the defendant will ask the court to submit an instruction to the jury regarding a lesser including offense.

As a Texas appellate court recently held, however, the court may choose to provide the jury with an instruction as to a lesser included offense regardless of whether either party requested the instruction. If you face criminal charges, you should retain a capable Texas criminal defense attorney to help you fight to protect your rights.

The Defendant’s Charges and Trial

Allegedly, the defendant was stopped by the police while he was on a bus. He submitted to a pat-down, which ultimately led to the revelation that he was carrying 332 grams of cocaine. He was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, to which he plead not guilty. The defendant did not testify at his trial but did not dispute that he possessed the cocaine. Rather, the contested issue at trial was whether the defendant intended to distribute the cocaine. During his closing, the defendant’s attorney argued that because the State had not produced sufficient evidence that the defendant intended to distribute the cocaine, the defendant was not guilty of the charged offense.

Continue reading →

In Texas, the State must produce sufficient evidence of a crime to support a defendant’s conviction. If a defendant is convicted despite insufficient evidence, he or she may be able to have his or her conviction overturned. For some crimes, such as assault of a family member, a defendant can be convicted based solely on the victim’s testimony.

This was explained in a recent case in which a Texas appellate court upheld the defendant’s assault conviction, despite the fact that the only evidence of the assault was the victim’s testimony. If you are facing assault charges, you should meet with an experienced Texas criminal defense attorney as soon as possible to formulate a plan for your defense.

The Alleged Assault and Trial

Reportedly, the defendant was charged with assault causing bodily injury to a family member. During the trial, the defendant’s wife testified that she and the defendant were in a car when they began arguing. At one point, the defendant threatened to hit his wife. The defendant then pulled over and struck his wife. He began driving again but pulled over a second time and pulled his wife out of the car and threw her to the ground and kicked and hit her. The defendant then left the scene and the wife called 911. During the 911 call, she reported that she and her husband were arguing and the defendant hit her in the head. The wife also testified that she felt pain due to her injuries.

Continue reading →

For many crimes, in addition to proving that the defendant committed an illegal act, the state must prove the defendant’s state of mind at the time the act was committed to convict a defendant of a crime.  In most cases, the state will show intent by producing evidence that allows the fact finder to infer the defendants’ state of mind at the time a crime was allegedly committed.

Recently, in Johnson v. State of Texas, the court found that the state had produced sufficient evidence of the defendant’s intent to commit theft, based on communications and transactions the defendant had with his victims. If you are facing theft charges, you should consult an experienced Texas criminal defense attorney to discuss what evidence the state has in support of the charges against you and to assess the most appropriate action going forward based on the facts of your case.

Defendant’s Contracts and Transactions

Reportedly, the defendant ran a mortuary. He did not perform cremations at his place of business but subcontracted that work to other entities. It became evident that he was accepting payments for cremations that were not performed when the defendant’s landlord visited his place of business and found several decaying bodies. The defendant was subsequently charged with two counts of theft for taking money to perform services that were never performed. A jury convicted the defendant of the charges, after which he appealed. On appeal, the court of appeals found insufficient evidence to sustain the convictions and, therefore, reversed the convictions. The state then petitioned the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas for review.

Continue reading →

In Texas criminal courts, the state must advise the jury of the charges a defendant faces and the elements of any charge. If the charges submitted to the jury are improper, it can result in an unjust conviction or inappropriate sentence. In Walker v. Texas, the Court of Appeals of Texas held that instructing a jury on the issue of assault with a deadly weapon in a case where the defendant only used his hands during the assault was not an error, because hands could be used as deadly weapons. If you face assault charges, it is important to obtain an experienced Texas criminal defense attorney to thoroughly explain all the charges and help you prepare a strong defense.

Facts of the Case

Reportedly, the defendant and his alleged victim lived together for three years. They began arguing, after which the defendant allegedly grabbed the victim, threw her across the room, and placed his arm across her neck. The defendant only used his hands during the assault. The victim later testified that she wanted the defendant to stop hurting her but she was not fearful that he was going to kill her. The day after the assault, the victim met with police and sought treatment for her injuries. The police investigated the incident and ultimately charged the defendant with third-degree felony assault family violence. During the trial, the investigating officer testified that hands could be used as deadly weapons.

Allegedly, at the end of the trial, the jury was provided with instructions that included an issue regarding the defendant’s use of a deadly weapon. During deliberations, the jury stated it reached a unanimous decision on the assault charge but not on the deadly weapon issue. The state ultimately waived the deadly weapon issue and the jury convicted the defendant on the assault charge. The defendant appealed. On appeal, his conviction was affirmed.

Continue reading →

WASHINGTON (CN) – Justices Neil Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor teamed up for a dissent Monday after the Supreme Court rejected an appeal over forensic witnesses in criminal trials.

breathalyzerEarly on in the 4-page opinion, Gorsuch quotes precedent to laud cross-examination as possibly “the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.”

“The Constitution promises every person accused of a crime the right to confront his accusers,” Gorsuch wrote.

Contact Information