TDCAA    TDCAA Community  Hop To Forum Categories  Criminal    Patrol Car Videos
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Patrol Car Videos Login/Join 
Member
posted
I have had several traffic cases that when I lay the foundation for the police car video, the defense attorney objects to the audio and the judge sustains the objection. The defendant does not testify and I have not had any success arguing Rule 801 or 803. I am unable to find Case Law on point. Does anyone have any suggestions?
 
Posts: 2 | Location: Odessa, TX | Registered: December 19, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Objects on what ground? Hearsay?


L.
 
Posts: 21 | Location: Conroe | Registered: May 09, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
One objection was Prejudice outweighs Probative value and the other objects to an interview without access to counsel and both allows the video but suppress the audio.
 
Posts: 2 | Location: Odessa, TX | Registered: December 19, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Neither of those are cognizable objections. Of COURSE the entry of the audio is prejudicial. THAT'S WHY IT'S PROBATIVE! But look at what the actual rule (403) excludes: "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of *unfair* prejudice." Evidence which establishes the guilt of the defendant isn't unfair.

The other objection is even further afield. A defendant does not have a right to an attorney until either: critical stages of prosecution have taken place (which can't happen on the side of the road) OR there's a custodial interrogation. If the person isn't in custody, there's no right to an attorney. A normal traffic stop doesn't create custody until the person is actually arrested. Detention? Yes. Custody? No. Also, the right to counsel must specifically be invoked. If they didn't invoke it on the tape then there's no grounds for them to object to it later. That's obviously just a tumbnail sketch, but without BOTH elements of custody AND interrogation then there's no right to an attorney. John Stride and John Rolater's "Confessions" by TDCAA is invaluable on these points.

Is this in front of a JP? Please tell me it's a JP.
 
Posts: 394 | Location: Waco, Tx | Registered: July 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Along those lines, look at Casey, 215 S.W.3d 870, for a good explanation of how courts should apply the Rule 403 balancing test.

Brody is absolutely right about the defendant's statements on the side of the road.


L.
 
Posts: 21 | Location: Conroe | Registered: May 09, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Go here (on DWI Resource page), for all the law that matters, and from the sound of it in the court you find yourself, the law may not matter.

http://www.tdcaa.com/dwi/case_law/video.html
 
Posts: 293 | Location: Austin, TX, US | Registered: September 12, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

TDCAA    TDCAA Community  Hop To Forum Categories  Criminal    Patrol Car Videos

© TDCAA, 2001. All Rights Reserved.