Motion to Quash Indictment Obtained via Perjured Testimony
Motion to Quash Indictment Obtained via Perjured Testimony
This product is legally relevant in all U.S. 50 states and territories. This product comes in both .pdf and .docx (Microsoft Word) formats for your convenience.
Have any questions regarding this product? Please feel free to email: support@attorneydocs.com
Motion to Determine Competence of Witness – Taint Hearing – Special Victims Unit
Motions the Court to analyze the interview techniques of the interviewer to determine if they undermined the reliability of the complainant’s statements and testimony. The term “competency” refers to the minimal qualifications someone must have to be a witness. In order to be a witness, a person other than an expert (experts are a special case discussed later in the course) must meet seven basic requirements. When determining competency one of the primary questions taken into account is the person’s ability to make decisions in a legal capacity.
Motion in Support of Necessity of Taint Hearing, Response to State’s Objection – SVU Case
Motion in support of the previously filed “motion for a pretrial taint hearing” to determine whether the statements and testimony of the child sex abuse witness must be excluded if improper questioning has irremediably compromised the reliability and trustworthiness of that testimonial evidence.
Motion to Suppress DNA in a Sex Case
Motions the Court to exclude any DNA related evidence at trial in this matter.
DNA evidence can become contaminated when DNA from another source gets mixed with DNA relevant to the case. For this reason, investigators and laboratory personnel should always wear disposable gloves, use clean instruments, and avoid touching other objects, including their own body, when handling evidence.
Forensic evidence increasingly includes genetic fingerprinting, but researchers worry that juries may put too much stock in the results. Since the advent of DNA testing, it’s solved cold cases, connected crimes committed in different jurisdictions and even freed innocent men from death row.
One of the most reliable forms of evidence in many criminal cases is in our genes, encoded in DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). DNA evidence can be collected from blood, hair, skin cells, and other bodily substances. It can even be used to solve old crimes that occurred prior to the development of DNA-testing technology.
Compared to fingerprinting or eyewitness testimony, which both have inherent flaws and inaccuracies, DNA evidence is a highly effective way to match a suspect to biological samples collected during a criminal investigation.
Motion to Quash Indictment Obtained via Perjured Testimony in a Sex Crimes Case
Motion to Quash Indictment Obtained via Perjured Testimony in a Sex Crimes Case
A motion to quash is a request to a court to render a previous decision of that court or a lower judicial body null or invalid. It can arise out of mistakes made by any lawyer in a court proceeding. … For example, a party that receives improper service of process may file a motion to quash.
This product is legally relevant in all U.S. 50 states and territories. This product comes in both .pdf and .docx (Microsoft Word) formats for your convenience.
Have any questions regarding this product? Please feel free to email: support@attorneydocs.com
Motion in Limine to Exclude or Limit Expert Testimony in a Sexual Crimes Case
This product is a motion in limine to limit expert testimony in a sex crimes case.
This product is legally relevant in all U.S. 50 states and territories. This product comes in .docx (Microsoft Word) format for your convenience.
Have any questions regarding this product? Please feel free to email: support@attorneydocs.com
In U.S. law, a motion in limine is a motion, discussed outside the presence of the jury, to request that certain testimony be excluded. The motion is decided by a judge in both civil and criminal proceedings.
Consolidated Motion For A Mental Evaluation Of Witness TMR To Assess Testimonial Competency
This document involves the defense of a sex offender case. This particular file is a motion for a mental evaluation of a witness. This is very useful when challenging the validity of witness testimony.
Motion to Reconsider and Reopen Record
Motion to Reopen Immigration Court testimony based upon Respondent’s incompetency. Respondent became confused during testimony due to a traumatic brain injury which caused serious cognitive defects and memory and confusion issues. Motion requested that Court reopen the record and take additional testimony of Respondent’s lack of competence.
DEFENDANT’S SIXTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING NAME
Defendant’s sixth motion in limine regarding the testimony of expert witness.
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF SIXTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING NAMES
Defendant’s reply in support of their sixth motion regarding the testimony of the expert. This motion asks the court to prevent plaintiffs from introducing evidence, testimony, or opinion from the Judge.
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING PEV AND RESERVE INFORMATION
Defendant’s reply in support of second motion regarding the prevention of plaintiff from introducing evidence, testimony, or argument regarding the pure exposure value (PEV) or reserve information for the expert witness.
DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF FIFTH MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING MILLER VALUATIONS
Defendant’s motion to ask the court to prevent plaintiff’s from introducing the testimony from their expert witness.
DEFENSE REQUEST FOR IN-PERSON TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO U.S. CONST. AMEND. VI AND C.R.S. §16-3-309(5) REGARDING TESTING AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY [DEF – 2]
|
DEFENSE REQUEST FOR IN-PERSON TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO U.S. CONST. AMEND. VI AND C.R.S. §16-3-309(5) REGARDING TESTING AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY [DEF – 2] |
Defendants’ Combined Motions in Limine
Defendants motion to exclude from trial testimony and evidence of (1) expiration of the statute of limitations against; (2) Defendants’ budget, profit, and bonus policies; (3) irrelevant previous crimes; (4) Defendants’ firearm policy; (5) subsequent remedial measures; (6) Defendants’ alleged failure to produce evidence; (7) Plaintiffs’ injuries; (8) insurance coverage; and (9) placing the jury into the Plaintiffs’ position.
Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Defendants’ Experts
Plaintiff’s motion to limit the testimony of four of the defendants’ experts.