Posted on

Ohio v. Clark: A Bit of Confrontation Clarification, A Few Tantalizing Hints

The United States Supreme Court decision in Ohio v. Clark has been heralded by many prosecutors and legal scholars as significantly broadening the admissibility of evidence under the Confrontation Clause, as interpreted by Crawford v. Washington and its progeny. The decision does not break startling new ground, however; rather, the Court’s decision is one that flows more or less naturally from the Court’s previous pronouncements about what it is that makes a hearsay statement testimonial, and therefore inadmissible at trial unless the witness is subject to cross-examination, either at trial or (in the case of a witness unavailable for trial) at a prior proceeding. This article reviews the opinion’s direction and guidance to trial courts (and prosecutors) about the admissibility of statements made to individuals not affiliated with law enforcement, as well as statements made by children or others who may be limited in their ability to grasp the notion of potential future prosecution. The article discusses the importance of the opinion’s deviation from the language used in previous decisions—a distinction that promises to fuel the ongoing debate about the future of Confrontation Clause jurisprudence.

Ohio-v.-Clark-A-Bit-of-Confrontation-Clarification-A-Few-Tantalizing-Hints-SIB30

Posted on

Evidence of Other “Bad Acts” in Intimate Partner Violence, Sexual Violence, Stalking, and Human Trafficking Prosecutions

In proving a case of intimate partner violence, sexual violence, stalking, or human trafficking, it is often crucial to introduce evidence that the defendant has committed some other crime or bad act—usually before or after the charged crime. Such evidence is often viewed with caution by trial and appellate courts, because of the perceived risk that juries will convict the defendant based upon evidence that they committed some crime other than the one charged or that the defendant is a bad person and therefore probably guilty of the charged crime. Prosecutors should file pretrial motions in limine any time they anticipate introducing evidence of a defendant’s crimes or other bad acts, regardless of whether such a motion is required by law. It is important to identify, and to argue, any potentially applicable grounds for admission. This article describes the theories under which evidence of other bad acts might be admissible, depending on the law of the jurisdiction, gives examples, and offers further resources to help prosecutors overcome specific objections.

update

Posted on

Williams v. Illinois and Forensic Evidence: The Bleeding Edge of Crawford

The application of Crawford principles in the context of forensic evidence continues to plague the criminal justice system. The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Williams v. Illinois raises more questions than it answers about when and how an expert may testify to conclusions based upon the opinions or work of other (non-testifying) experts or technicians. This webinar reviews the relevant case law, and explores how trial prosecutors can present a case involving forensic testing conducted by a multitude of technicians and experts. It also addresses Williams’s impact on cold cases, in which original experts who performed autopsies and other forensic examinations and testing are no longer available for trial. The presenter provides practical suggestions to trial prosecutors who must balance limited resources against the need to secure convictions that will withstand confrontation challenges on appeal.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1.5 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Technical Evidence in Stalking Prosecutions: Where to Get It and How to Get It In

The use of personal computers, mobile devices, and other technology in stalking activity presents challenges for the prosecutor who must connect the activity to the defendant. Prosecutors must be familiar with the sources of available evidence, how to obtain it from technology providers, and how to present it effectively to a jury. This webinar covers the applicable rules of evidence and relevant case law associated with proving a technology-facilitated stalking case. The presentation provides strategies for introducing technical evidence and for responding to common objections at trial.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1 hour of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Stop Calling It ‘Revenge Porn’: Prosecuting Image Exploitation

Image exploitation involves the nonconsensual creation, possession, or distribution of an image or images depicting victims engaged in consensual sexual activity or being sexually assaulted. As technology continues to evolve more quickly than the law, image exploitation crimes are being addressed by a patchwork of criminal laws. We as prosecutors must continue to respond to this complex crime and to hold offenders accountable under imperfect or untested laws. This webinar explores the various forms of image exploitation and the types of statutes under which this abuse can be prosecuted, enabling prosecutors to choose the most advantageous charging strategies within their own jurisdictions. In addition, the presenter offers offender-trial strategies are offered to assist in overcoming common victim-blaming defenses.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1 hour of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

SPARC: Igniting the Conversation and Improving our Response to Stalking

With a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), the Stalking Prevention, Awareness, and Resource Center (SPARC) was formed, as a project of AEquitas, to provide allied professionals with the tools, resources, and support necessary to enhance their ability to identify stalking and to respond effectively. This webinar discusses how to access SPARC resources, raise community awareness, and coordinate with allied professionals to better identify and respond to victims of stalking and hold offenders accountable.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1 hour of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Safeguarding Victim Privacy: A Plan of Action for Prosecutors

Prosecutors have an obligation to provide to the defense all evidence in the government’s possession or control that is material to a defendant’s guilt or punishment. How can we fulfill that obligation, while at the same time safeguarding victim privacy against unnecessary disclosure? Filing motions for protective orders and vigorously opposing defense demands for irrelevant private information is an important part of trial practice for any prosecutor responsible for these sensitive cases. This webinar identifies categories of confidential and/or privileged victim information and records, discusses threshold requirements for defense attempts to obtain such information or for in camera review of records, and suggests pretrial and trial strategies that support the protection of victim privacy, including collaboration with allied professionals to safeguard private information.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1 hour of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Safeguarding Victim Privacy in a Digital World: Ethical Considerations for Prosecutors

Prosecutors have an obligation to provide to the defense all evidence in the government’s possession or control that is material to a defendant’s guilt or punishment. How can we fulfill that obligation, while at the same time safeguarding victim privacy against unnecessary disclosure? In the digital age, these cases present unique ethical challenges related to privacy and confidentiality, prosecutorial discretion, recantation, and disclosure of evidence. This presentation uses hypothetical case scenarios to: address ethical considerations in the context of the investigative function of prosecutors, digital evidence, discovery obligations, and immunity; identify confidential, privileged, non-material, and/or irrelevant victim information and records; discuss threshold requirements for defense attempts to obtain information or for in camera review; introduce pretrial and trial strategies that support the protection of victim privacy, including collaboration with allied professionals.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1 hour of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Overview of Stalking and Technology: Prosecution Strategies

Stalking affects 6.6 million people in the United States each year and every day, in courtrooms throughout the country, stalking victims recount the fear and distress they have experienced as a result of this crime. Stalkers create and exploit vulnerabilities in their victims, relying on technology and manipulation of the justice system to conceal their crimes and cast doubt on their victim’s credibility. This webinar gives an overview of stalking and the modern technology stalkers use. It discusses investigation and prosecution strategies as well as interviewing techniques designed to maximize victim participation and safety. It also addresses the correlation between stalking and other forms of violence and examines the role of stalking in assessing lethality. The presentation emphasizes the importance of using a collaborative approach between law enforcement, victim advocates and prosecutors to assist victims and hold offenders accountable.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1.5 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.

Posted on

Keep Calm and Understand Elonis v. U.S.

The decision of Elonis v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2001 (2015), in which the United States Supreme Court reversed the defendant’s conviction for posting on Facebook threats to harm his wife and others, has caused a good deal of concern among prosecutors, civil attorneys representing victims in protective order proceedings, law enforcement, and advocates. The webinar analyzes the Court’s opinion, breaks down its meaning for the investigation and prosecution of cases involving online threats and stalking, and explains why the Elonis decision is not cause for alarm. The presenters, one of whom authored an amicus brief in the Elonis case, suggest strategies for charging and presenting evidence in cases involving threats or stalking on public forums, such as Facebook, to maximize the likelihood of a conviction that will stand up on appeal.

This webinar recording should qualify prosecutors for 1.25 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) credits. Prosecutors are encouraged to contact their state bar association in reference to application requirements and related fees.