Notes from practice · D.C. Superior Court
Acta exteriora indicant interiora secreta
Today’s legal maxim is not particularly eloquent, in either Latin (acta exteriora indicant interiora secreta) or English (“outward acts indicate the thoughts hidden within”). But...
Defining “Readily Available” in Clyburn v. U.S.
“Readily available” is defined in Washington, D.C. as being in close proximity or easily accessible during commission of crime of violence/dangerous crime....
Once Again, No Consequences for Prosecutorial Misconduct
On the morning of trial, the prosecutor finds out that the testimony provided by a police officer at the preliminary hearing was inaccurate. Although the...
Actus Me Invito Factus Non Est Meus Actus
After a guest post by my brother turned out to be one of the most popular pages on this site, I had hoped that the...
Toward an “open file” discovery requirement
If Brady provides a constitutionally protected right to information, legislatures in this country should provide a mechanism to enforce this requirement....
What Is “Unprovoked Flight” Under Illinois v. Wardlow?
Flight hasn’t always been such a terrible thing. At one time, courts seemed to recognize that there might be all sorts of reasons an innocent...
In Re W.R.: Warrantless Search During a Custodial Arrest
Jejomar Untalan has been busy. I reported last week on his successful appeal in In re S.B. This week the D.C. Court of Appeals issued...
California v. Hodari D: A Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Complaint
California v. Hodari D, 499 U.S. 621 (1991), is a lousy opinion. It used to be that a person was seized for Fourth Amendment purposes...
SCOTUS on Flight: Alberty v. United States
“[I]t is a matter of common knowledge that men who are entirely innocent do sometimes fly from the scene of a crime through fear of...
The “Corpus Delicti” Rule: Statements Alone Are Not Enough
My client was walking along one night in Philadelphia when he was jumped by three men who took his money and firearm. When he went...
Thorne v. U.S.: No penalty to defendant for exercise of constitutional rights
Jamison Koehler
/
06/03/2012
/
The defendant should not have been penalized at sentencing for having exercised his constitutional right to cross-examine the government’s witness at trial....
Bringing the Judge Into A Plea Bargain
“That’s as low as my office is willing to go for this type of offense.” This is what the prosecutor tells me. We are talking...
Dawkins v. United States: How Far Must A Party Go To Preserve Issue For Appeal?
In an opinion issued last week, Dawkins v. United States, 41 A.3d 1265 (D.C. 2012), the D.C. Court of Appeals addressed the issue of how...
The ABCs of “Character Evidence” in a D.C. Criminal Case
Over 65 years ago, Justice Robert H. Jackson, writing for the U.S. Supreme Court in Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (1948), complained about...
Morgan v. U.S.: Inconsistent Evidence at Trial and “Show Cause” Hearing
One of the things that surprised me when I first began to practice criminal law was the notion that you could be acquitted of a...