The Importance of Knowing How to Prepare For and Litigate a Trial
The attorneys at Anderegg & Associates have vast experience in arguing their clients’ cases to a jury. Through a combination of thorough preparation, knowledge of the rules of evidence, and good courtroom skills, Anderegg & Associates has enjoyed great success in litigating jury trials whenever such a step becomes necessary to vindicate our clients’ interests.
Identifying an Effective Defense
Tanya was charged with delivering a controlled substance after allegedly selling a gram of cocaine to an undercover officer. However, because the officer was involved in an ongoing drug investigation and did not wish to blow his cover, Tanya was not immediately arrested. Instead, law enforcement authorities waited more than one year before formally charging Tanya with the felony. She immediately called Anderegg & Associates which had successfully defended her on other charges in the past.
The attorneys at Anderegg & Associates realized that the amount of time which had elapsed between the alleged drug transaction and the formal filing of charges was the key to Tanya’s defense. More specifically, Tanya’s attorney calculated that the undercover officer’s identification of Tanya as the actual culprit would be subject to challenge and therefore, mistaken identity would be an effective trial defense. Significant preparation was therefore devoted to reconstructing where Tanya was and what she was doing during the relevant time frame. In addition, since Tanya’s appearance had changed during the intervening year, the undercover officer’s overly confident in-court identification of Tanya as the individual who sold him drugs more than a year earlier was impeached as being too effortless and unequivocal. Tanya’s attorney had further demanded and obtained fingerprint testing of the corner-cut baggies containing the cocaine and pointed out that Tanya’s prints were nowhere to be found. In less than one hour of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Hiring an Expert Witness
Kim was charged with Operating While Intoxicated and Operating with a Prohibited Alcohol Concentration, both as a third offense. Poor field sobriety test performance and a blood test over the legal limit made success defending the case appear problematic. Fortunately, Kim retained the law firm of Anderegg & Associates to represent her.
The attorney assigned to Kim’s case realized Kim had a solid blood alcohol curve defense. He therefore hired an expert toxicologist who established that although Kim’s blood alcohol concentration was over the legal limit at the time her blood was drawn (more than one hour after her arrest) she actually was below the legal limit when she was stopped (the critical time of “operation”). The expert explained to the jury that there was a legal explanation for the discrepancy between what he testified was Kim’s lawful blood alcohol concentration (bac) at the time of driving and the blood test result upon which the State was relying: unabsorbed alcohol in Kim’s stomach at the time she was stopped was subsequently absorbed into Kim’s blood stream during the hour after the stop and before the blood was drawn, thereby elevating her bac to an unlawful level. The value of her field sobriety test performance was also thoroughly discredited by the fact she was asked to perform the tests in high heels and a tight dress. The jury returned verdicts of not guilty on both counts.