 |  |
| | |
Philadelphia female criminal defense attorney Alexandra Kramen handles the following criminal violations:
FREE INITIAL CONSULTATION
215-469-3307
To convict a criminal defendant, the prosecutor must prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. As part of this process, the defendant is given an opportunity to present a defense. Possible defenses to a criminal charge:
“I Didn't Do It.”
Most often accused defendants try to avoid punishment by claiming they did not commit the act in question.
All people accused of a crime are legally presumed to be innocent until they are proven guilty, either in a trial or as a result of plea bargain or pleading guilty. This presumption means that the prosecutor must convince the jury or the judge in a bench trial, of the defendant's guilt, but also that the defendant need not say or do anything in his own defense. A defendant has the right to remain silent, not present any witnesses, and argue that the prosecution failed to prove his or her burden. If the prosecutor can't convince the jury that the defendant is guilty, the defendant goes free.
The prosecution must convince the judge or jury hearing the case that the defendant is guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt"- A difficult standard to meet. The high burden of proof in Pennsylvania criminal cases means that judges and jurors are supposed to resolve all doubts about the meaning of the evidence in favor of the defendant. With such a high standard imposed on the prosecutor, a defendant's most common defense is often to argue that there is in fact Reasonable Doubt.
An alibi defense consists of evidence that a defendant was somewhere other than the scene of the crime at the time it was committed. For example, assume that Jim is accused of committing a burglary on Love Street at midnight on Friday, December 8. Jim's alibi defense might consist of testimony that at the time of the burglary, he was with his friends at the Whisky Bar.
Sometimes a defendant can avoid punishment even if the prosecutor shows that that the defendant did, without a doubt, commit the act in question.
Self-defense is a defense commonly asserted by someone charged with a crime of violence, such as battery, assault with a deadly weapon, or murder. The defendant admits that he or she did in fact commit the crime, however, claims that it was justified by the other person's threatening actions. The core issues in most self-defense cases are:
Self-defense derives from the belief that people should be allowed to protect themselves from physical harm. This means that a person does not have to wait until he or she is actually struck to act in self-defense. If a reasonable person in the same circumstances would think that he or she is about to be physically attacked, that person has the right to strike first and prevent the attack. However, an act of self-defense cannot use more force than is reasonable -- someone who uses too much force may be guilty of a crime. For example, If Johnny threatened to punch Tommy in the arm, it would be unreasonable force for Tommy to pull out a gun and shoot Johnny.
The insanity defense hinges on the principle that punishment is justified only if the defendant is capable of controlling his or her behavior and understanding that what he or she has done is wrong. Because some people suffering from a mental disorder are not capable of knowing or choosing right from wrong, the insanity defense prevents them from being criminally punished.
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution governs search and seizure law in Pennsylvania and limits the power of the police to make arrests, search people and their property, and seize objects and contraband (such as illegal drugs or weapons). These search and seizure provisions are all about citizen privacy. Therefore, the Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement officers.
However, the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are considered "reasonable." Essentially this means that police may conduct a search of your home, barn, car, boat, office, personal or business documents, bank account records, trash barrel, or whatever, if:
The Fourth Amendment applies to searches only if a person has a "legitimate expectation of privacy" in the place or thing searched. If not, the Fourth Amendment offers no protection because there are no privacy issues.
Courts typically use a two-part test to determine whether, at the time of the search, a defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place or things searched:
For example, a person who uses public restrooms expects not to be spied upon (the person has an expectation of privacy) and most people would consider that expectation to be reasonable (there is an objective expectation of privacy as well). Therefore, the police installing a hidden video camera for spying in a public restroom will be considered a "search" and would most likely be deemed unreasonable under Fourth Amendment standards.
At the same time, if the police were looking for, and found a weapon on the front seat of a car, it is not considered a "search" under the Fourth Amendment because it is very unlikely that the person would believe the front seat of the car is a private place (no expectation of privacy), and even if the person did believe the front seat to be a private place, society would not be willing to extend the protections of privacy to that particular location.
If a court finds that evidence was obtained as the result of an unreasonable search, any evidence seized as a result of the search cannot be used as direct evidence against the defendant in a criminal prosecution, state or federal. This rule is known as the "exclusionary rule." Evidence resulting from an illegal search cannot be used to discover other evidence, under the legal rule known as the "fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine."
It does not matter whether an interrogation occurs in a jail or at your house, or on a busy downtown street, or while in custody, or the middle of an open field. If a person is in custody (deprived of his or her freedom of action in any significant way), the police must give a Miranda warning if they want to question the suspect and use the suspect's answers as evidence at trial. If a person is not in police custody, then no Miranda warning is required and anything the person says can be used at trial if that person is later charged with a crime. This exception most often comes up when the police stop someone on the street to question him or her about a recent crime or the person blurts out a confession before the police have an opportunity to deliver the warning.
Quite often people are surprised to learn that if a person has not yet been arrested, the police may question the person and use the answers in court without first providing the "Miranda warning" that advises people of their constitutional right to not answer questions and to have an attorney present if they do decide to talk to police officers.
Information voluntarily disclosed to a police officer (after the person has been properly warned) is usually admissible at trial. The key word is "voluntary." Police officers are not allowed to use physical force or psychological coercion to get a suspect to talk to them. If police officers obtain information through any forceful or illegal means, the prosecutor cannot use the information at trial. In addition, under the rule known as "the fruit of the poisonous tree," any evidence obtained by the police as the result of a coerced statement is also inadmissible.
Felony is the most serious class of offense in the United States. Many jurisdictions separate felonies into their own classes in order to punish repeat offenders who commit heinous crimes more severely than a first-time offender convicted of committing a felony in a less hateful, cruel, or heinous fashion. A felony is generally punishable by a fine, imprisonment for more than a year, or both. Many crimes classified as felonies are considered offensive to the moral standards in most U.S. communities. Felonies include terrorism, treason, arson, murder, rape, robbery, burglary, and kidnapping to name a few.
In many states a felony is defined not only by length of incarceration, but also by the place of incarceration. Crimes that are punishable by incarceration in a state prison are considered felonies in a number of jurisdictions, while crimes that are punishable only by incarceration in a local jail are deemed misdemeanors. For crimes punishable by incarceration in either local jail or state prison, the crime will normally be classified according to where the defendant actually serves the sentence.
Misdemeanor is a criminal offense less serious than a felony and more serious than a mere infraction. Generally, misdemeanors are punishable by a fine or incarceration in a local jail, or both. Many states separate misdemeanors into three classes: high or gross misdemeanors, ordinary misdemeanors, and petty misdemeanors. These jurisdictions may use a number system in order to designate the level of misdemeanor (i.e. 1 would be the highest, 3 would be a less severe misdemeanor). Petty misdemeanors usually carry a jail sentence less than six months and a fine of $500 or less. The punishment prescribed for gross misdemeanors is greater than that prescribed for ordinary misdemeanors and less than that prescribed for felonies.
Infraction, a.k.a. petty offense, or summary offense, is the violation of an administrative regulation, an ordinance or municipal code, and, in some areas, a state or local traffic rule. In many states an infraction is not even considered a criminal offense and thus not punishable by any period of incarceration. Instead, such jurisdictions treat infractions as civil offenses. Even in jurisdictions that treat infractions as criminal offenses, incarceration is not usually contemplated as punishment, and when it is, confinement is limited to serving time in a local jail.
(215) 469-3307
"WHEN YOUR FREEDOM IS AT STAKE, THERE IS ONLY ONE CALL TO MAKE."
| Serving clients in:
|
HOME OUR MISSION ATTORNEYS & STAFF PENNSYLVANIA PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER DIRECTIONS CONTACT US
PA WRONGFUL DEATH LAWYER PA DRUG AND PRODUCT LIABILITY LAWYER PA MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ATTORNEY
PA AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT ATTORNEY PA CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY
This website provides general information about cases represented by My Civil Attorney. My Civil Attorney will only provide legal advice after having entered into an attorney-client relationship. Use of this site does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. It is imperative that any action taken be done on the advice of counsel. Because every case is different, the description of awards and cases previously handled do not guarantee a similar outcome in current or future cases. If you are in need of legal assistance and are located in Montgomery County, Bucks County, Horsham, Montgomeryville, Norristown, Doylestown, Montgomery Township, North Wales, Blue Bell, Whitpain, Lower Gwynedd, Upper Gwynedd, Lansdale, Hatboro, Chalfont, Warrington, Lower Providence, Upper Providence, New Britain, Hatfield, Souderton, Skippack, Lower Merion, Upper Merion, King of Prussia, Abington, Cheltenham, Jenkintown, Upper Moreland, Lower Moreland, Worcester, Upper Dublin, Plymouth, Glenside, Towamencin, Conshohocken, East Norriton, West Norriton, Limerick, Franconia, Villanova, Whitemarsh contact a lawyer at My Civil Attorney directly.
Use of any of the images on this site without the express written consent of My Civil Attorney is strictly prohibited.
