Is it new evidence?

[HisFriend]

What is the name of your state? Texas ... Can we file a post-conviction motion for a hearing for a new trial based on "new" evidence. This evidence was available at the time of the original trial, but was not presented by the defense attorney?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state? Texas ... Can we file a post-conviction motion for a hearing for a new trial based on "new" evidence. This evidence was available at the time of the original trial, but was not presented by the defense attorney?

My response:

No. Since the "evidence" was known, and not presented to the trial court, then it's forever waived.

IAAL

 

[calatty]

You may be able to file a habeas or request other post-conviction relief based on the defense attorney's ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to present that evidence. But you have to show that the defendant would most likely have been acquitted had that evidence been presented.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

You may be able to file a habeas or request other post-conviction relief based on the defense attorney's ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to present that evidence. But you have to show that the defendant would most likely have been acquitted had that evidence been presented.

My response:

I was going to mention that too - - but then, I thought the better of myself for NOT mentioning it. Look, the kid is a criminal, and I have to believe that defense counsel knew what he/she was doing by keeping such "evidence" out. Obviously, at least to me, that the criminal needs to be, and should be, behind bars.

I'm wondering if you're suffering from "Political Bi-Polarism"?

One day, you're as Liberal as the come, and the next, you're one of my Conservative heroes.

Which are you today?

IAAL

 

[HisFriend]

You may be able to file a habeas or request other post-conviction relief based on the defense attorney's ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to present that evidence. But you have to show that the defendant would most likely have been acquitted had that evidence been presented.

My response:

I was going to mention that too - - but then, I thought the better of myself for NOT mentioning it. Look, the kid is a criminal, and I have to believe that defense counsel knew what he/she was doing by keeping such "evidence" out. Obviously, at least to me, that the criminal needs to be, and should be, behind bars.

I'm wondering if you're suffering from "Political Bi-Polarism"?

One day, you're as Liberal as the come, and the next, you're one of my Conservative heroes.

Which are you today?

IAAL

My response to your responses:
I'm a little confused ... I was simply asking a question and feel like perhaps I got in the middle of something else between the two of you???? I don't know what the evidence was/is that was not presented or if it would even have helped his defense. At the same time, I know the defense attorney wasn't the sharpest ... As they say about doctors who finish last in the class still being called doctor, I believe the same of some attorneys. All are not good, in spite of the title. I totally agree that criminals do belong behind bars and if this man (not kid) did what he was convicted of doing, then he should be in jail where he is and remain there until he rots -- regardless of new or old evidence.

I appreciate both points of view. Thank you.

 

[calatty]

Don't mind IAAL and me, we always have something between us. IAAL, nothing in the man's post indicated his friend was guilty of anything. It was just a legal question and I gave a legal answer. Practically speaking, it is almost impossible to prove IAC in failing to present evidence. But it does happen that innocent men are found guilty and the mistake is discovered through post-conviction remedies -- look at all those DNA cases, just two last month in San Francisco. We differ on how we approach posts - I generally stick to legal advice and leave the moral angle to you, except when the people are over the top, in which case, upon your sage advice, I share my personal opinion. If giving legal advice to criminal defendants is "liberal," then I am liberal because that is my job. I don't think there is a direct correlation though. There are plenty of politically conservative defense lawyers.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

" . . . we always have something between us."

==============================

My response:

I'd like to think so . . . but, are we thinking the same thing?

IAAL

 

[HomeGuru]

Originally posted by calatty

Don't mind IAAL and me, we always have something between us. We differ on how we approach... - I generally stick... and leave the angle to..... except when....... over the top.......in which case, I share........

 

[HisFriend]

Well I feel special to have such enlightened and opposing view points! Seriously ... I wouldn't have taken the dual angle view if not for the two of you "having something between you". If nothing else, the two of you have opened my eyes to some possibilities I would not have considered otherwise.

Getting back to the legal end for a moment ... Is the evidence law the same in all states? Texas is a different animal than the rest of the USA, so I am curious if they are blanketed under the same rules.

I really do appreciate the legal and/or personal view and opinions. And by the way ... HisFriend is female.

THANKS!