Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
  Quote

2) Whether Adnan's attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by not investigating Asia.

Expand  

Obvious first question:

"Do you remember when we used to dance, and incidents arose from circumstance?"

Edited by clapclapclap
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 3/9/2019 at 1:03 AM, Kyle said:
assume she still would have had a commensurate staff of assistants, investigators, etc., that would have vetted Asia.

 

 

You clearly don’t know many criminal defense attorneys.

 

 

Posted
  On 3/8/2019 at 8:24 PM, bschoolprof said:

The Maryland Court of Appeals (their state supreme court) overturned the Court of Special Appeals ruling 4-3.  Adan's conviction is thus reinstated and he is not granted a new trial.

article

opinion

There were two legal questions the court took on:

1) Whether Adnan had waived a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for not investigating the reliability of cell phone tower evidence.  The court rules yes - he waived it because he did not raise this issue originally in his post-conviction proceedings.  This all grew out of post-serial internet sleuthing.  Even the dissenting justices agreed on the waiver issue. More on this if interested:

  Reveal hidden contents

2) Whether Adnan's attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by not investigating Asia. This is a two pronged test: a) whether counsel was deficient in investigating the witness (the majority ruled yes); 2) whether the deficiency was "prejudicial" or would have mattered in terms of the verdict (the majority ruled no).  More on why they said no:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

Ugh.  I don't like the state being able to appeal these.  It just seems to me to be inconsistent with the presumption of innocence, or the policy that underlies it, more accurately.

Posted
  On 3/9/2019 at 7:20 PM, DanRydell said:

 

 

You clearly don’t know many criminal defense attorneys.

 

 

Expand  

This is the truth.  There are plenty of defense lawyers that have staff and resources commensurate with any type of trial.  But these folks cost in the 10s or more likely 100s of thousands of dollars to retain/engage for a major felony.

The more workaday criminal defense lawyer may have access to such resources, but only if the client is able to pay for them on an hourly or per-task basis.  They are able and diligent trial lawyers (and some aren't this at all), but to assume that proper resources will be brought to bear for a non-wealthy client is foolish.

  • Like 1
  • 11 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...