In our latest podcast episode, we get into the legal ethics and the often-overlooked responsibilities of prosecutors in disclosing exculpatory evidence. This evidence can be pivotal in ensuring a fair trial and just outcomes.

The discussion kicks off with an overview of the landmark case Brady v Maryland, which established the prosecutor's duty to disclose any evidence that might exonerate the defendant. This duty, however, is not always straightforward.

Prosecutors must not only disclose the evidence they have but also actively seek out any exculpatory information that might be in the possession of the police or other government entities. This affirmative duty is crucial in maintaining the integrity of the legal process.

We then move on to real-life examples. The case highlights the dire consequences when prosecutors fail to disclose exculpatory evidence. The discussion reveals that the prosecutor's duty extends beyond their own files and includes any information the State might possess. This often leads to tension and challenges in the courtroom, especially when such evidence is discovered late in the trial process.

One of the most intriguing parts of the episode is the exploration of Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs). These units, which exist in only a handful of counties, are designed to review cases and ensure that justice is served. These units are like internal affairs departments within the prosecutor's office, tasked with scrutinizing past convictions for potential errors or misconduct.

The episode discusses how CIUs can uncover crucial evidence that was previously overlooked or withheld, potentially leading to exonerations and the correction of wrongful convictions.

Prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and police officers are all prone to mistakes. The adversarial nature of the legal system is designed to bring these mistakes to light, but it requires diligence and integrity from all parties involved. The episode concludes with a call for more widespread adoption of CIUs and other measures to ensure that justice is not only pursued but achieved.

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

We go with a fascinating question from listener Kathy about the concept of "fighting words" and their legal implications.

This episode gets into into the complexities of free speech, examining how certain words can be deemed so offensive that they might justify legal action, even in a country that cherishes the First Amendment.

Steve begins by exploring the historical context of "fighting words," referencing the landmark Supreme Court case Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire from the 1940s. This case was one of the first to address whether certain offensive words could be criminalized.

The Supreme Court upheld the New Hampshire statute, marking a significant moment in the legal history of free speech. However, Steve notes that this decision has been gradually eroded over the years, particularly during the Vietnam era, when cases involving anti-government protests and insults directed at police officers were often ruled as protected speech under the First Amendment.

One of the key takeaways from this episode is the nuanced nature of the "fighting words" doctrine. While the Supreme Court has allowed for some limitations on free speech, these instances are rare and often contentious.

Steve explains that most speech, no matter how offensive, is still protected, emphasizing the importance of the First Amendment in safeguarding our freedom of expression.

The episode also touches on the rights of juveniles in public schools, referencing another significant case, Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent School District. This case involved a student who wore a black armband to protest the Vietnam War, leading to a landmark ruling that students do not lose their constitutional rights when they enter a public school.

Steve highlights this case to illustrate that free speech protections extend to all individuals, regardless of age, and that schools cannot arbitrarily limit these rights.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

In this episode of Lawyer Talk, Steve Palmer delves into the intricacies of legal pleas using the recent Hunter Biden case as a backdrop. Discover the differences between Alford and no contest pleas, their implications, and why defendants might choose them. Steve breaks down complex legal jargon into simple terms, making it accessible for everyone.

(00:00) Lawyer talk podcast breaks down dozens of legal topics

(00:36) Hunter Biden tried to plead no contest to tax fraud charges

(05:19) Bill Clinton: Alfred plea was used in civil rights cases back in 1963

(08:53) Steve Palmer: Judges have ultimate authority to accept or reject guilty pleas

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

We explore a tragic case that sheds light on the complexities of criminal law and the stark differences between classroom theory and courtroom reality. Joined by Troy, a second-year law student, we get into the legal implications of a DUI incident that resulted in the deaths of two Columbus Blue Jackets hockey players, both brothers, who were tragically killed the day before their sister's wedding.

The episode begins with an overview of the case, where the brothers were riding bicycles on the berm when a car, driven by an individual over the legal alcohol limit, struck and killed them. This heartbreaking incident serves as a backdrop for a deeper discussion on the legal principles that govern such cases.

One of the key concepts discussed is "mens rea," a fundamental element in criminal law that refers to the mental State of the defendant at the time of the crime. The host explains that to commit a crime, one must have both an act (actus reus) and a mental state (mens rea). This principle is crucial in understanding why certain actions, like running a red light, can lead to severe consequences if they result in fatalities.

The discussion then shifts to the differences between negligence and recklessness. Negligence, as explained, is typically a minor misdemeanor, often resulting from simple mistakes like changing the radio station at an inopportune moment. However, when actions are deemed reckless, such as texting while driving or speeding excessively, the legal consequences can escalate to felonies. The addition of alcohol to the mix further complicates matters, leading to charges like vehicular homicide or aggravated vehicular homicide.

Throughout the episode, real-world examples and case studies are provided to illustrate these legal principles in action. The host shares personal experiences from his legal practice, highlighting the emotional and ethical challenges faced by both the victims' families and the defendants. The role of grief and forgiveness in sentencing is also explored, offering a nuanced perspective on how different families cope with such tragedies.

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

In the latest episode of Lawyer Talk, Steve takes on a challenging question from a listener named Gavin: Why are district attorneys never sued when they bring frivolous lawsuits against people?

This question strikes at the heart of the legal system and the protections afforded to government officials. Steve dives deep into the intricacies of prosecutorial immunity, the nuances of Section 1983 civil rights litigation, and the emotional and financial toll of wrongful prosecution.

Gavin's question is one that many people have pondered, especially those who have found themselves on the wrong side of the law through no fault of their own. Steve acknowledges the frustration and the seeming imbalance in the system, noting that it often appears to be set up in favor of the government. After all, the government created the system, and it seems designed to protect its own.

Steve explains that while there is a mechanism in place—Section 1983—that allows for lawsuits against government officials for civil rights violations, many officials enjoy something called qualified immunity. This legal doctrine shields police officers and local government actors from lawsuits unless they violate clearly established constitutional rights. However, prosecutors, judges, and legislators often have absolute immunity, making it nearly impossible to sue them for actions taken in their official capacity.

Despite the grim reality, Steve offers a glimmer of hope. He discusses a recent case that went up to the US Supreme Court, where Justice Sotomayor hinted that the Court might be willing to reconsider the doctrine of absolute immunity for prosecutors. This could signal a potential shift in the legal landscape, offering some hope to those wrongfully prosecuted.

Throughout the episode, Steve emphasizes the emotional and financial toll that wrongful prosecution can take on individuals. He shares his own experiences from his law practice, where clients are acquitted but left financially and emotionally drained. The fight for justice is often long and arduous, and even when won, it can feel like a hollow victory.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Ever wondered what happens when the police ask for your identification, and you refuse? In this episode, Steve Palmer dives into a real-life case that explores this very issue. Joined by Troy, a second-year law student at Capital University, Steve breaks down the legal intricacies of a bench trial involving a woman who was charged with obstruction of justice for not providing her full identification to the police.

Steve and Troy discuss the difference between civil and criminal matters, the significance of reasonable suspicion, and the overarching constitutional rights that protect you from unlawful demands for identification. They also touch on the practical side of dealing with police encounters and why sometimes it's better to comply to avoid unnecessary legal battles.

Get ready to learn about the nuances of stop-and-identify laws, the implications of Giuliani-era policies, and how these legal principles play out in real-world scenarios.

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Learn the key differences between probation and parole, and get essential advice on adhering to parole conditions.

If you've ever wondered about the intricacies of parole, probation, and the legal responsibilities that come with them, this episode is a must-listen.

Steve begins by clarifying the fundamental differences between probation and parole, terms often used interchangeably but with distinct meanings.

In Ohio, for instance, probation is now referred to as "community control," and parole is known as "post-release control."

Understanding these terms is essential for anyone navigating the criminal justice system, whether as a professional or an individual affected by these legal conditions.

The listener's question revolves around the obligation to inform a parole officer about contact with law enforcement, even when the parole period is nearing its end. Steve emphasizes that almost every parole condition requires the individual to notify their parole officer of any law enforcement contact, regardless of how close they are to completing their parole. Ignoring this obligation could lead to severe consequences, including the possibility of parole revocation.

Steve also sheds light on the procedural aspects of parole violations. If a parole officer decides to file a violation complaint, it must occur before the parole term expires. Once the term is over, it's generally too late to initiate such proceedings.

However, if a complaint is filed, the individual has constitutional rights, including the right to a hearing and legal counsel, although these rights are not as extensive as those in a full trial.

One of the key takeaways from this episode is the importance of seeking legal advice when faced with potential parole violations. Steve strongly advises against taking matters into your own hands, as the risks of getting caught and facing severe penalties are significant. Instead, he recommends consulting a lawyer who can provide tailored advice based on the specific terms and conditions of your parole.

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

We discuss the Idaho murder case and the complexities of jurisdiction and venue changes in criminal trials.

Steve Palmer and Troy dive into the complexities of the legal system that aren't covered in Law School. They discuss the high-profile Idaho murder case involving Brian Kohberger, focusing on the legal intricacies of jurisdiction and venue changes.

The conversation also explores historical cases like Sam Shepard's and O.J. Simpson's, shedding light on the rare occurrence of venue changes in criminal cases.

Copyright 2024 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.