Police officers have challenging jobs. They often deal with people when they are at their worst. They have to conform to numerous legal limitations as they try to protect the public and investigate criminal activity.
Most officers are quite diligent about ensuring that they conform to all current legal standards. However, sometimes officers make choices that violate best practices. They might break the law or infringe upon the civil rights of a suspect during an interaction. In some cases, the misconduct of officers can directly lead to them gathering seemingly compelling evidence.
People facing criminal charges have options available to them as they seek to prove their innocence. Showing that officers violated the law or infringed on an individual’s rights could be part of a successful criminal defense strategy.
The state cannot use ill-gotten evidence
If prosecutors could use the evidence that police officers obtained by breaking the law or mistreating individuals, then law enforcement corruption might be a much more serious concern in the United States. Thankfully, court standards about unlawful evidence are very clear.
Defense attorneys can and frequently do use the exclusionary rule to protect their clients. If they can show the courts that police officers did something illegal or inappropriate, then a judge may have to exclude certain evidence from the upcoming criminal proceedings.
For example, if officers violated an individual’s Miranda rights during questioning, then any contradictory statements or confessions they make after that violation may not be admissible evidence. If police officers conduct an inappropriate traffic stop and later decide to arrest the driver for impairment, any evidence obtained during the traffic stop may ultimately be inadmissible.
People who suspect that they have experienced law enforcement misconduct may need to discuss their concerns with the defense attorney. They may be able to leverage the misconduct that they experienced as part of their comprehensive criminal defense strategy.
Excluding evidence can lead to the prosecutor dismissing pending charges. Even if the case goes to trial, the defendant may have an easier time avoiding a conviction if their lawyer eliminates some of the state’s evidence.
Preventing the state from using certain evidence can be part of an effective criminal defense strategy. Defendants may need help reviewing their interactions with law enforcement to determine the best defense options available, and that’s okay.
