Police officers have an obligation to follow and uphold the law. In some cases, their eagerness to enforce the law may result in them violating the rights of people they suspect of criminal activity.
Police officers sometimes conduct warrantless searches without adequate legal justification. Other times, they may violate a person’s Miranda rights by failing to advise them of their rights or ignoring them when they attempt to invoke those rights.
In cases where police officers have clearly violated the rights of an individual, a defense attorney can use that misconduct as part of a criminal trial strategy.
Not all evidence is admissible
For evidence of criminal activity, ranging from items found during a search to confessions, to be admissible in court, police officers must follow strict standards when gathering that evidence. There are many rules that apply to searches depending on the type of search conducted. There are also clear standards for questioning people in state custody.
If police officers violate a person’s rights, the evidence they secure becomes “fruit of the poisonous tree.” A defense attorney can ask the courts to consider the misconduct of police officers and suppress or exclude the evidence.
The prosecutor may not be able to present a confession or contradictory statements made after a violation of a person’s Miranda rights during a trial. Any evidence found during an unlawful search is also eligible for suppression. Excluding key evidence is often an important component of a successful defense strategy.
A criminal defense attorney can help people determine if police misconduct might affect their criminal case. Securing the support of an attorney early in the criminal justice process can protect people from unfair charges and unnecessary convictions.