mt:Include module="Global Settings" /> dismisal in the interest of justice Archives: Colorado Criminal Lawyer Blog

Recently in dismisal in the interest of justice Category

December 26, 2011

Dismissed DUIs in Colorado Underscore Need to Investigate Lead Police Officer's Credibility


Recently in Mesa County Colorado on the Western slope of Colorado, the District Attorney's office was forced to dismiss eight criminal cases in light of credibility questions surrounding a former Colorado State Trooper.

Because of the impact of the lead officer's testimony in a DUI caae, the District Attorney's officer is reviewing hundreds more cases that are expected to be dropped in the coming weeks.

The tropper - Donald Moseman, stepped down from the State Troopers Office in December after a departmental investigation.

The cases that have been dismissed are all drunk driving misdemeanor cases that had Moseman as the sole witness for the prosecution but additional cases in additional areas are also subject to the same scrutin .

The result of this action has led to a demand by Colorado Defense Lawyers in the area to turn over the contents of Moseman's internal affairs investigation, and it is expected that a judge will compel the department to turn over those records so that the judge could perform a private review to determine if there was material in that file that is relevant to these cases

This kind of material is called Brady Material and is considered directly exculpatory or potentially exculpatory evidence therefore the District Attorney is required by Colorado Law to turn over material bearing on the credibility of their primary witness.

The Grand Junction Sentinel reproted that:

"A letter dated Dec. 5 that was sent to Hautzinger by State Patrol Major Barry Bratt said an internal investigation found Moseman "displayed bias" in cases involving drivers suspected of being impaired by drugs or alcohol. The letter said Moseman submitted reports that "were a combination of reports from prior arrests and the current arrest, resulting in reports which contained wrong or conflicting information." "

December 3, 2010

The High Cost of Too Much Cooperation - "Helpful Witnesses"

Federal authorities on Thursday dropped their prosecution of a southern California man charged with two felonies for modifying Xbox 360 consoles, following a severe berating by a judge and an admission they made procedural errors, Wired.com reported.

The criminal trial against 28-year-old Matthew Crippen was the first to test how anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act applied to game consoles. The 1998 law prohibits the hacking of technology intended to prevent access to copyrighted material. Matthew Crippen of Anaheim, California, was arrested in 2009 [1] on charges related to modifications he made to the optical disc drives of two Microsoft consoles

According to Wired.com, which was providing gavel-to-gavel coverage of the trial, opening statements were delayed on Wednesday after US District Judge Philip Gutierrez blasted prosecutors for a series of missteps. They included alleged unlawful behavior by government witness Tony Rosario, who secretly videotaped Crippen as he accepted $60 to modify an Xbox. The judge also lashed out at prosecutors' proposed jury instructions that he said were harmful to the defense.

"I really don't understand what we're doing here," Gutierrez was quoted as telling prosecutors.

The government responded by asking for a recess, but later pressed on with the case.

On Thursday, Rosario, an undercover agent for the Entertainment Software Association, testified that during his 2008 meeting with Crippen, the hacker inserted a pirated video game into the modified console, a key detail in the prosecution that had never been aired before. After defense attorneys objected, the prosecution admitted they first became aware of the new claim on Sunday but had failed to alert Crippen's defense team.

Assistant US Attorney Allen Chiu then agreed to dismiss the charges in light of the omission and "based on fairness," Wired.com reported.


H.Michael's Take

The federal criminal justice system relies, at times, on "paid for" testimony of witnesses with little or no credibility. Despite the best efforts of - what I consider to be - ethical prosecutors -- the culture of "cooperation" will lead to witnesses wanting to be so helpful they will slant their testimony or even intentionally "filll gaps" in the DA's or US Attorney's case that are obvious weaknesses. Even veteran federal agents and seasoned detectives find this somewhat tempting.

The price - of course - is damage to the entire system of justice and dismisal of the case based on "justice." Here the US prosecutor had no choice and did the ethical thing.