Criminal defense lawyers must balance empathy and objectivity. They frequently represent clients accused of heinous crimes and must be prepared to face emotional trauma throughout the trial.
In court, the prosecution has the burden of proving that a crime occurred beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the defense attorney’s job to poke holes in the state’s theory and offer an alternative explanation.
Insanity Defense
A criminal defense lawyer can present an insanity defense to argue that you were not responsible for the crime you committed due to a mental illness or disease at the time it occurred. It is different from the incompetence defense, which looks at whether or not you are mentally competent to proceed to trial.
In order to use an insanity defense, it must be proved that you did not know that the action was illegal or that it was wrong due to a mental defect or disease at the time of the offense. This is known as the M’Naghten rule, and it is a cognitive test that requires two elements.
Other tests include the irresistible impulse test and the substantial capacity test, which looks at a defendant’s ability to understand that their behavior is illegal or conform to legal requirements. New Hampshire uses the Durham rule, which is a non-cognitive test.
Drug Charges
Drug crimes include possession, cultivation/manufacture and selling/distribution of controlled substances. A skilled criminal lawyer who is familiar with federal and state drug laws can provide the best defense against these types of charges.
To be guilty of drug charges, the prosecution must prove that (a) you possessed drugs and (b) you knew you possessed the drugs. The defenses to these charges often revolve around the intent aspect of committing a crime.
For example, if a friend asks you to leave a package at their house on your way to work and you don’t know the box contains cocaine, you may have a defense under fleeting possession.
Another common drug crime defense involves challenging the amount of drugs that were found. The quantity of drugs can elevate the charge from a misdemeanor to a felony and dramatically affect your sentencing.
Entrapment Defense
The entrapment defense claims that government agents enticed or coerced you to commit a crime. This is a complicated defense strategy that requires careful attention to detail and can vary in interpretation from state to state. An experienced lawyer can help you understand your options and how the defense might apply to your case.
For example, a potential suspect might be approached by undercover law enforcement agents who ask him to sell drugs. The suspect initially resists, saying he does not do drug dealing anymore, but after consistent pressure from the agents, he relents and commits the crime.
To prove a successful entrapment defense, you will need to show that you were not predisposed to the crime prior to the influence of the police officers. Some states use an objective test, while others use a subjective standard.
Mistake Defense
In general, mistakes of fact and mistake of law are criminal defenses that can allow a defendant to avoid a conviction. This is because they negate elements of the crime, such as intent.
For instance, suppose someone takes a coat from the coat check at a restaurant and they believe it is theirs. If they are able to prove that this was an honest and reasonable mistake, then they could potentially avoid charges of theft. Want to know more on strafverteidigung münchen? Research them now!
Mistake of fact can also be used in other crimes, such as liability without fault & strict liability. However, it is not usually a viable defense in cases where the defendant has to have knowledge of the law. It must be a genuine ignorance of the law to qualify for this defense.
Constitutional Rights Violations
Constitutional rights violations are often a very effective criminal defense strategy. These rights involve the way a person is treated by government agencies, and they can impact cases from the very beginning. For example, a constitutional violation at the search and seizure stage of a case could result in evidence being tossed out. This makes the prosecution’s job harder, which can help you avoid a conviction and long-term consequences.
A person can argue a constitutional claim offensively by filing a suit for declaratory or injunctive relief in federal court. It is also possible to do so defensively at a trial, but this may be more difficult because the judge who is hearing the case is likely to have run for re-election and would be less inclined to declare state laws unconstitutional.