Dealing with Prejudicial Evidence in an Arizona Criminal Trial
When evidence regarding a defendant is more prejudicial than it is relevant, it is the defense attorney’s job to fight to exclude the evidence in order to keep the jury from being unnecessarily biased. In a recent case before the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two, the defendant successfully appealed his conviction of second-degree murder based on the fact that the evidence the prosecution introduced at trial was both prejudicial and irrelevant. In its opinion, the court emphasized the fact that it is unfair for the prosecution to introduce unhelpful evidence “for the express purpose of influencing the jury’s view” of the defendant.
The Evidence at Trial
This case began when the defendant was charged with second-degree murder. The defendant admitted to killing the victim in the case, but he argued at trial that he shot the gun out of self-defense. This self-defense argument was crucial for the defendant’s chance at receiving a more favorable sentence. During trial, the court allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence regarding weapons and ammunition that investigators found in his home. The weapons had nothing to do with the specific gun that the defendant used to shoot the victim.
To justify using the evidence, the prosecution argued that the evidence helped the jury assess the defendant’s reasonableness, or lack thereof. The prosecution explained that the defendant was a “paranoid” person, and having guns in his home helped the jury see that he was unreasonable, and therefore less likely to reasonably act in self-defense.
The Appeal
The jury found the defendant guilty. On appeal, though, the higher court reversed the guilty verdict. It was out of line, said the higher court, for the lower court to allow the jury to hear evidence about the defendant’s weapons in his home. These weapons had nothing to do with the case at hand. What’s more, said the court, a self-defense justification does not depend at all on whether a defendant is a “reasonable” person. For these reasons, then, the trial court incorrectly allowed the jury to review the evidence. The court reversed and remanded the case, and the defendant will get another shot at trial, this time without the prejudicial evidence in the record.
Are You Looking for an Experienced Phoenix Violent Crimes Attorney?
At the Law Office of James E. Novak, we understand that during trial, there is so much on the line. Because your personal rights and freedoms are extremely important, we fight aggressively to defend our clients facing criminal charges. We also understand the rules of evidence, and we know how to challenge the admission of prejudicial evidence. Smart litigation tactics can go a long way, and because of our decades of experience in the field, we are well-equipped to handle your criminal defense needs. For a free and confidential consultation with an expert Phoenix violent crimes attorney, give us a call today at 480-413-1499. You can also fill out our online form to tell us about your case and have a member of our team get back in touch with you as soon as possible to discuss next steps.
