Los Angeles Criminal Lawyers Blog

Discovery is a very important part of a criminal case. It is a crucial element for Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyers, as it is the majority of the evidence that the case will rest on. Discovery itself is the process in which the defense will obtain evidence processed by the Prosecutor regarding the case. Prosecutors may also obtain evidence and information from the defense side to help build their case.

Discovery will include pictures taken at an arrest site, surveillance, arrest reports, statements and officer's observations. It is essentially any evidence gathered by either side that they will be using to prove their case. One of the most common forms of discovery is an arrest report. It is the foundation upon which Prosecutors build their case.

The arrest report may be obtained at the first court hearing, also known as the arraignment. Generally when the person being charged has hired an attorney to represent them, the attorney can go into court and ask the Prosecutor for a copy of the discovery. The prosecutor will ask the attorney for a business card so that they can keep track of who the discovery was given to, and provide the lawyer with a copy.

For DMV hearings in DUI cases, the discovery could also include surveillance tapes. Oftentimes squad cars are equipped with video cameras and will tape an arrest from when the person is pulled over, until they have been taken into custody. It is, therefore, important for a Los Angeles DUI attorney to request the surveillance tapes from the DMV. These tapes are crucial to review prior to a hearing. To request discovery for a surveillance tape is a little more complicated. The attorney's office must send a written request and authorization in order to obtain discovery.

The discovery process is an important one. An experienced defense attorney will always obtain discovery from the district attorney or the city attorney before arguing a case or entering a plea. The discovery will give insight into the strength of the prosecutor's case.

For example, a client might inform their attorney that the officers had no probable cause to pull him over for suspicion of a DUI. Upon reviewing an officer's report, the attorney might find that, in fact, the officers have not written a reason for having pulled the driver over. Instantly the attorney will know that the prosecutors' have a weak case because there was no initial reason to stop the driver. If there is no probable cause for a stop, a significant element of a DUI case is not met, and the case is a strong one for defense.

An attorney is able to obtain all discovery faster than a person who is not represented. The advantage of having the report sooner rather than later is to be able to prepare a defense and a powerful argument before the attorney has to enter a plea or appear before the Judge.

Many of our clients who have been charged with a Driving Under the Influence charge, claim that they did not become intoxicated at their own volition. Many argue that someone tampered with their drink, and added more alcohol or possibly even a drug that led them to become intoxicated.

This is a defense that has to be presented carefully. It requires strong evidence that supports the argument being made. Prosecution will prepare a strong rebuttal in each situation, but an experienced San Diego DUI Lawyer will be able to anticipate the potential arguments and will have a powerful defense prepared in your favor.

To prove that there was involuntary intoxication, one of the strongest types of evidence that may be presented is witness testimony. If a person can provide testimony that they directly observed someone pouring alcohol or drugs into your drink, without your knowledge, your case may have a strong defense. However, there are several concerns by prosecutors when proving a criminal case through the use of witness testimony.

One of the concerns will be who the witness is. If the witness is a close friend, family member or a significant other, the prosecutor will present the argument that the person might be biased, and their testimony may not be credible. If the person is someone you are close to, their testimony will likely be presented in a light most favorable to your case. In these situations, testimony will be taken as evidence, but the Prosecutor will do their best to discredit or weaken the evidence.

If the witness testifying is a stranger, someone who was at the scene and has no previous relationship with the person being charged, their testimony will be given more weight. Similarly, if it is a direct observation by a bystander, it will provide strong evidence for the defense.

Other forms of evidence that may be presented are surveillance tapes, which will also be strong evidence. Weaker forms of evidence can be circumstantial evidence such as possibly a receipt indicating that non alcoholic drinks were bought. However, circumstantial evidence is difficult to find in cases regarding involuntary intoxication and may not be the strongest support for the Criminal Defense attorney's argument.

A defense for cases that involve intoxication is difficult to prove. The evidence is available, but even when presented may not be as strong as it should be. It is the job of the Criminal Defense Lawyer to prepare an argument that is powerful and gather evidence that cannot be doubted in Court. If it can be proven that intoxication was involuntary and against a person's will, then there is a key component of a criminal case missing. Each criminal case must be the result of a person's own volition. Proving involuntary intoxication may lead to a case being dismissed or reduced.

California Penal Code §459 makes it unlawful for any person who enters a dwelling or structure with the intent to "commit grand or petit larceny or any felony is guilty of burglary".

Two major elements must be met for any person to be convicted of a burglary charge. The Prosecutor must prove to the Court that the person being charged is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of both.

It must be proven that 1) the person entered a dwelling or structure and 2) they had the intent to commit theft of burglary. The prosecutors prove their case by using evidence such as witness testimony, evidence of break ins, DNA and other genetic evidence as well as observations of the scene after the fact.

Proving that a person entered a dwelling or structure is difficult, especially when a powerful defense is available. The government must prove that a lock was picked, a window was broken in, or there were footprints matching the person charged inside the structure. The definition of structure is very broad, and it will include any kind of structure such as a home, business, vessel, tent or even a warehouse.
They must show that there is strong evidence that the person being charged had broken and entered into the structure.

Demonstrating that the person had the intent to commit theft or burglary is even more difficult. This is a much harder element to provide because it goes to the mind of the person, or their mens rea. The government will use observations and other evidence to show the element. For example, if the person came with a crow bar, and gloves on, and perhaps bags for stolen things, there is a strong case to be established for the intent to commit a crime.

Let's consider two scenarios. Scenario A involves David who comes to a store after hours with a crow bar and an empty bag. He uses the crow bar to break the door latch and enters putting everything he sees into a bag. The silent alarm is triggered and the cops arrive and arrest David. There is a strong case for prosecution because David had a crow bar, he used it to enter the building and did, and then was in the act of putting things into the bag which indicates a clear intent to steal the items.

In comparison, Scenario B involves Dan who needs to borrow some DVD's. He goes to his friend's house who knows he comes into his house all the time when he is not home. His friend also keeps a back window open that Dan knows about. Dan crawls in through the window and grabs a few dvd's and leaves, fully intending to return them when he is done. The friend does not mind that Dan does this. By strict facts, this could be a case for burglary because Dan entered a dwelling and took some items that were not his. There is breaking and entering but there is a good defense for intent. Dan did not intend to commit a crime, he was borrowing a movie from a friend, especially because the friend had given him consent.

Burglary is a very serious charge and can result in harsh consequences if a person is convicted. Give yourself the best fighting chance and hire an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney to defend you.

A person who has been charged with a criminal case in Los Angeles will be brought before the Criminal Court so that a case can be conducted to determine whether they will be guilty or not. A Prosecuting attorney will set out to prove that the person being charged is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal defense attorney will present a defense that goes to show that there is not enough evidence to determine guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by casting doubt on the evidence presented.

There are two types of evidence that a prosecutor and a defense attorney will use to prove their arguments; direct evidence, and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is evidence that is directly observed, it provides direct evidence of guilt. An example of direct evidence in a DUI case is a blood test that reads over .08. A blood test reading will provide evidence that the driver was intoxicated.

Direct evidence in other criminal cases will include direct police observation, and the testimony of that officer on the stand stating that what he or she observed. If there is a case for assault, direct observation would also include a nearby witness who saw the assault happen. For example, lets say Dan and Victor were having a heated discussion on the street outside of a bar. Will is the guy working at the door and checking I.D's. The discussion between Dan and Victor escalates and Dan hits Victor. Will standing nearby witnesses the whole incident and is questioned later by authorities that are called. The testimony that Will provides will be direct evidence.

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that combined together points to the trust or supports an assertion. Circumstantial evidence will be different pieces of evidence that doesn't provide the direct truth, but infers a truth. For example, officers obtain a search warrant to search the home of a person suspected of being in possession of drugs for sale. What the officer directly observes and testifies on, will be direct evidence.
However, the drug paraphernalia, such as scales, baggies of weighed drugs and grown marijuana or what not, will be considered circumstantial evidence. The paraphernalia compiled together points to the inference that the person whose home it was, was in possession of the drugs for sale.

Direct evidence will hold more weight in court, in comparison to circumstantial evidence because it is evidence that goes to the truth of the crime, and not the truth through inference. Direct evidence may be weakened by a witness's credibility. If the person testifying is not a neutral party, their testimony may be taken lightly because there may be somewhat of a doubt of bias. In the example of Dan and Victor, Will was the neutral person offering direct evidence in the form of testimony. If Will was a friend of Dan's his testimony would be weakened in comparison to Will being a worker at the bar.

Evidence will make your case stronger, and will help cast doubt on prosecutor's case. A well prepared defense by a knowledgeable Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney will give you the best chance of having your case dismissed or in the very least, reduced.