Exculpatory Evidence Case Study

The case involved an individual by the name of Danny Escobedo, who was arrested on January 19, 1960, for the murder of his brother-in-law. Escobedo was arrested without a warrant and interrogated; he did not make any statement to the police and was released after contacting his lawyer. On January 30, Benedict DiGerlando, told the police about Escobedo’s involvement in the crime that Escobedo “had fired the fatal shots” (Escobedo v. Illinois- Supreme Court Cases: The Dynamic Court, 1999, pg.2). He was later arrested a second time and taken to the police headquarters. Soon enough Escobedo requested to have “advice from my lawyer”

Upon considering the facts of the case – • Maher learned that his wife was having an affair with one, Mr. Hunt. • Maher found Mr. Hunt in the saloon and shot him. • Maher was arrested and charged with attempted murder. • The Trial Court did not admit into evidence that both Maher’s wife and Mr. Hunt were having an affair. – (Suk, 2017).

Let's explore another case, where we have Ryan Ferguson, from Jefferson City, Missouri. Ferguson is accused of killing a popular sports editor, Kent Heitholt, from Columbia Daily Tribune, on Halloween night in 2001. Ferguson has been in prison now for eight years. The accuser is Charles Erickson, who claims that he and Ferguson agreed to rob someone for money to help them buy more alcohol. Erickson went in to the police station two years after the murder and gave the police suspicion that he knew some of what happened the night Heitholt was killed.

Holtzclaw’s unwavering attorneys tried many strategies and excuses to try to prove his innocence but it was useless in every case. His attorneys obdurately continued to fight for Daniel Holtzclaw in any way they could even when the victims themselves continuously told their stories at the sentencing. Holtzclaw’s unyielding attorneys should have given up due to all the evidence found yet they continued to represent him even when the chances were little to nothing. Holtzclaw’s sister also continues to fight for his innocence by running a blog that claims to tell his side of the story. All of Holtzclaw’s willful attorneys no matter how good they were at their job were not enough because the evidence and the truth overpowered them and won in the

Tonya Hailey rested uncomfortably in her bed in the Ford County hospital. The medicine given to her a few hours prior was still in full affect so pain was not a problem. However, the mental damage inflicted on her by the white men in their yellow truck was still fresh in her mind. When she closed her eyes, she could picture nothing but their silhouettes standing over her bounded body doing unspeakable acts. Tonya could only pray and let her mind wander, would she be ok?

The Appellate court remanded the trial court's decisions on the following issues: (1) Did the district court err in affirming that the student was no longer eligible for special education under the IDEA Act based on her strong academic record, however not determining whether she had a reading fluency deficit? and (2) Did the district court err by failing to make an independent judgment based on parents' additional evidence? It was stated that the district court should exercise independent judgment and that they weighed too heavily on Jane's overall academic achievement when the deficiency in reading fluency was sufficient to support eligibility. Also, the district court did not make an independent judgment as to the additional evidence

Prosecutors have the very important job of representing the people in a court of law on both state and federal levels. Prosecutors are under obligation to execute the law on both federal and state levels. However, the discretion that they are afforded under United States law gives them nearly absolute and unreviewable powers to choose whether or not to bring forth criminal charges, and also what charges to bring for cases when the evidence is enough to those justify charges. Plea bargaining is another area in which falls under a prosecutor’s vast discretionary powers, they can choose to bring full charges against the defendant or they can choose to show leniency by reducing the charges or dismissing the charges altogether. The incredible amount of discretion that prosecutors have in the criminal justice system places them

There was also a case where two guys were found guilty of a crime then were later found that they did not commit the crime after all. Damien Echols was said to have killed three boys in West Memphis. Three boys were found guilty of committing the crime but only Damien got the death penalty. The only evidence the police had of him being “related” to the case at all was that he liked to wear black and was in a mental institution at one point in his life. Damien’s lawyer kept fighting for evidence to be examined and the case to be reopened.

In the summer of 1996, a black man named Rodney Roberts was arrested and charged with the kidnapping and rape of a teenage girl. Proposed with two negative options: a plea deal of nine years in prison and a trial that could result in life imprisonment, Roberts took a plea deal offered to him knowing fully well of his own innocence. More than nine years later, the proposed victim stated in an interview with reporters that she never knew that anyone had been sentenced for her rape and denied ever having identified Roberts as her attacker from a mugshot or lineup. Soon after, in May of 2006, the Essex County prosecutor’s office ordered investigators to look for missing evidence involved in the Roberts case and found the original rape kit still sealed. Upon testing, it was revealed that Roberts was innocent.

A former GW graduate student who was found guilty Monday of first-degree murder might spend his life in prison. Rahul Gupta – who was found guilty of fatally stabbing his friend, a Georgetown University law student, in October 2013 – will face sentencing on April 16 after the jury deliberated his case for less than five hours, the Washington Post reported. Maryland, where Gupta was convicted, does not use the death sentence as a penalty for any crime, including murder. Gupta, who was pursuing a master’s degree in biomedical engineering at the time of the incident, initially told police that he had killed his friend Mark Waugh because he thought Waugh and his girlfriend were romantically involved behind his back. Gupta, Waugh and Gupta’s

For that reason, an officer has the power to stop a vehicle based on reasonable suspicion/mistake of fact that a crime has been committed (Schwinn 2014). Reasonable suspicion also incorporates the ideology of a reasonable mistake of fact. Unfortunately, minorities, especially African Americans are more likely to be affected by these instances or incidents. Previous studies conclude that these attacks or incidents involving law enforcement and unarmed African-American men are possibly influenced by racial prejudice (Raasch and Perron 2014). Cases of unarmed black men are not only increasing, but they are also threatening to the public, especially the black community.

Wrongful conviction is a situation where a person undergoes punishment for a crime they did not commit. It is a conviction reached in disputed or unfair trial. DNA evidence has been used in recent years to clear individuals falsely convicted so as to avoid execution of innocent people. There are means to overturn wrongful conviction as exhibited by most criminal justice systems, but this is not always easy to achieve. The following are the common causes of wrongful

Discovery is a formal and informal exchange of information between the prosecution and the defense. The importance of discovery is to ensure that the adversary system does not give one side an unfair advantage. When it comes to discovery there are two types of evidence. Exculpatory, which is any evidence that may be favorable to the defendant at trail either by tending to cast doubt on the defendant’s quilt or by tending to mitigate the defendant’s culpability, thereby potentially reducing the defendant’s sentence, and impeachment evidence, which is any evidence that would cast doubt on the credibility of a witness.

In all crimes, a motive is present. Motive is defined as the emotional, psychological, and material needs that impel and are satisfied by behavior (Turvey, 2011). It is the driving force of our choices and actions, therefore, when it comes to criminal investigation, establishing a motive can help solve crimes. However, some motives are not apparent during the early stages of an investigation and before court proceedings. Without a motive, it would be difficult to prove guilt since the number question needed to be answer for juries are the “whys” in crimes.

REPORTER: The reporter/Detective (Kim) called with concerns for the victim, Kierra. According to the reporter, on today (10/26/2015), a Forensic Interview was conducted on the victim. On Thursday, the victim was at school and a topic came up about a church, and the child got very upset. The teacher sent the child to see the counselor (Mrs. Brookes), and the child disclosed that she was sexually abused when she was 6 years old by Vishun Evans, who the victim said was 13 years old at the time of the incident.