Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Akers, the court stated that "if prosecutors insist on crying the wolf of the Williams Rule they might eventually find the courts hard of hearing." Critics of the way the Williams Rule is often used by the prosecution say that trial courts fail to require the requisite showing of relevance to the current issues before allowing the Williams ...
Character evidence is also admissible in a criminal trial if offered by a defendant as circumstantial evidence—through reputation or opinion evidence—to show an alleged victim's "pertinent" character trait—for example, to support the defendant's claim of self-defense to a charge of homicide. [10]
For example, if a party requests that the court find another party in contempt of an existing court order, the judge will typically issue an "Order to Show Cause Re Contempt" to the party accused of being in contempt of court. At the hearing on the order to show cause concerning contempt the judge will take evidence from both sides concerning ...
DWI courts tend to focus on the most serious cases and repeat offenders, and thus apply strict standards to the cases and defendants that come before them. [1] Drunk and impaired driving offenses involves a substantial risk of harm and death to the driver and to others, as a foreseeable consequence of such conduct. [2]
DUI and alcohol-related crashes have produced an estimated $45 billion in damages every year. The combined costs of towing and storage fees, attorney fees, bail fees, fines, court fees, ignition interlock devices, traffic school fees and DMV fees mean that a first-time DUI charge could cost thousands to tens of thousands of dollars. [25]
In the various states, a probable cause hearing is the preliminary hearing typically taking place before arraignment and before a serious crime goes to trial. The judge is presented with the basis of the prosecution's case, and the defendant is afforded full right of cross-examination and the right to be represented by legal counsel. If the ...
In his 2010 book I Love It When You Talk Retro, author Ralph Keyes connects the term to the Perry Mason TV series, which ran from 1957 to 1966. "As played by portly Raymond Burr", he wrote, "Perry Mason was a resourceful lawyer who generally pulled his client's chestnuts out of the fire at the last minute with some deftly posed question or just-discovered piece of evidence.
Following the Supreme Court's decision in R. v. Pham, lower courts extended its applicability to other collateral consequences. For example, courts have held that stigma or the loss of employment following a conviction to be collateral consequences that can be taken into account during sentencing.