Denial of Justice in Alabama

Citizens of the State of Alabama who often find themselves on the wrong side of the law are more than often deprived of their rights that’s written in the United States Constitution. The rights that are often violated are: 

1. The right to being secured against any unreasonable searches or seizures,

2. The right of be protected against being put in jeopardy of losing life or limb, nor being compelled in an criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,

3. The right to enjoy the right to a speedy trial, by an impartial jury; The right to being informed of the nature and cause of the accusation(s); The right to being able to confront witnesses against him/her; the right to have compulsory process of obtaining witnesses on his behalf,; the right to having the assistance of counsel,

4. The right of not being inflicted with cruel and unusual punishment and,

5. The right of not being denied equal protection of law.

The following is the manner in which defendants are guaranteed rights under both state and federal constitutions in criminal proceedings: 

1. The right to be secured against unreasonable searches and seizures is guaranteed under Article I, section 5 of the Alabama Constitution and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution,

2. The right to be secured against being put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law is guaranteed under Article I, section 5, 6 and 9 of the Alabama Constitution and the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution,

3. The right to enjoy the right to a fair and speedy trial by an impartial jury of the state and district, the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses on his/her behalf, the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense is guaranteed under Article I, section 6 of the Alabama Constitution and the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution,

4. The right to not be inflicted with cruel and unusual punishments is guaranteed under Article I, section 15 of the Alabama Constitution and the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and,

5. The right to not be denied equal protection of law is guaranteed under the Alabama Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

However, all of these rights are also guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 

These rights are often violated by: officers, detectives, district attorneys, trial judges, and defense attorneys. During the investigation of any criminal case, in most of the cases, officers and detectives will discover exonerating and favorable evidence. Instead of disclosing such evidence, they suppress it from district attorneys and defense attorneys. However, at times when the officers and detectives disclose such evidence to the district attorney, it is he/she who suppresses exonerating evidence. Whenever this takes place, it is a clear violation of state and federal laws. “Under state and federal law, the state is obligated in any criminal case to provide a defendant with any information that it has in its possession which could potentially be favorable towards the defense, either for the culpability phase or penalty phase of the trial.” Cases such as ex parte Monk, 557So.2d832(Ala.1989) and Brady v. Maryland, 373U.S.83(1963) are cases which the Alabama Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court has “made clear” that in capital cases “open file discovery” is necessary to protect the rights of the accused. 

“The Brady rule also encompasses evidence known only to police investigators and not to prosecutor.” See Kyles v. Whitley, 514U.S.419,437-38(1994). Violation of the above case laws by police officers/detectives or district attorneys results in a reversal of a defendant(s) conviction and/or sentence. “The withholding of evidence is grounds for reversal of a conviction.” See ex parte Womack, 541So.2d47(Ala.1988).  

During criminal trials the presiding judge is the overseer of the court. The presiding judge’s duty is to protect the rights of the defendant (guaranteed under the state and federal constitutions and laws) and to ensure that the trial is fair. Judges presiding over criminal trials often violate defendants’ rights by improperly preventing defendants from presenting their defenses is by; “Excluding testimonials evidence that supports his/her theory of defense.” In ex parte Griffin, 790So.2d351,353(Ala.2000) the Alabama Supreme Court held: “defendant is constitutionally entitled to present evidence supporting his defense where the evidence he is offering is probative and not merely speculation.” Also in Griffin, 790So.2d at354 the Alabama Supreme Court held: “defendants constitutional right to present defense supersede state evidentiary rules where the evidence supports probative alternative theory of culpability.”

In Holmes v. South Carolina, 547U.S.319,324(2006) the United States Supreme Court ruled that: The Constitution guarantees all defendants “Meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.” (quoting Crane v. Kentucky, 476U.S.683,690(1986)). Though state and federal laws forbid a judge from preventing defendants from presenting evidence supporting their theory of defense, judges often disregard the law and act as he/she pleases, violating the defendant’s rights which requires reversal if convicted. See Taylor v. Singletary, 122F.3d1390,1394(11^th Cir. 1997) in which the Eleventh Circuit court held: “trial court committed reversible error by denying the appellant’s “well established” right to mount a defense”.

During a criminal trial, defense attorney’s duty is to represent their client effectively. At the center of a defense attorney’s duty in representing their client is to: investigate and present substantial evidence that would undermine the state’s case against their client.

Defense attorneys must investigate every possible avenue of defense, investigate and challenge all assertions by the state and subject the state’s case to rigorous examination and testing. There are a number of ways that defense attorneys can violate a defendant’s rights during the trial process. One way is: failing to conduct a thorough investigation into their client’s case in order to effectively prepare for trial. In Greggs v. Georgia, 428U.S.153(1976) the United States Supreme Court ruled that: “At the heart of every effective representation is the duty to investigate and prepare the client’s case”. A second way is: failing to cross-examine or failure to cross-examine witnesses.

In Adams v. United States Ex rel. McCann, 317U.S.269,275,276,63S.Ct.236,240,87L.Ed.268(1942) the United States Supreme Court ruled that “The right to counsel plays a crucial role in adversarial system embodied in the Sixth Amendment since access to counsel’s skills and knowledge is necessary to accord defendant’s opportunity to meet the case of the prosecution to which they are entitled” (quoted Strickland, 466U.S.668(1984)). A defendant upon satisfying the standard set under Strickland v. Washington, 466U.S.668(1984) which is:

1. Defendant must show that counsel’s performance was deficient, requiring showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning at the “counsel” that’s guaranteed a defendant by the Sixth Amendment and

2. Defendant must show that the deficient performance did prejudiced the defense by showing that counsel’s errors were so serious as to deprive defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result was unreliable and is entitled to a reversal of conviction and a new trial.

Though defense lawyers are well aware of their duties to represent their clients effectively, they more than often fail with their obligation of being effective guaranteed under the United States Constitution, as well as the Alabama State Constitution.

T.Y.O.A.I.M

Randy Lewis