by Richard Resch

The Court of Appeals of New York reversed Harvey Weinstein’s convictions for various sexual crimes because the trial court improperly admitted into evidence “irrelevant, prejudicial, and untested allegations of prior bad acts” and compounded its error by ruling Weinstein could be cross-examined about those prior bad acts.

Background

Weinstein was charged with numerous sex-related crimes against three alleged victims identified as Complainant A, Complainant B, and Complainant C. At the time of the alleged crimes, he was a prominent and powerful individual within the entertainment industry. The prosecution contended that he took advantage of his position to coerce aspiring actresses into unwanted sexual encounters. The prosecution further alleged that when his unwanted advances were rebuffed, he used force.

During pretrial proceedings, the trial court granted, over the defense’s objection, the prosecution’s application to admit testimony regarding uncharged crimes as an exception to the Molineux rule, which ordinarily prohibits this type of evidence. The testimony was intended to show Weinstein’s intent and that he knew the Complainants did not consent to the sexual encounters. As a result, Complainant B could testify about uncharged sexual assaults that Weinstein allegedly committed against her, and three other women (collectively, “Molineux ...

by Richard Resch

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a jury’s verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity is an “acquittal” for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, despite the fact that the acquittal may be logically inconsistent ...

by Richard Resch

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland’s order and remanded for discovery and an evidentiary hearing on Kenyon Paylor’s petition to vacate his guilty plea, which alleged his plea was induced by egregious police misconduct ...

by Richard Resch

The Court of Appeals of New York suppressed incriminating evidence recovered from a cyclist after police officers initiated a traffic stop of the cyclist, searched him, and recovered a loaded handgun, holding that the same standard for initiating a traffic stop of motor vehicles applies to bicycles ...

by Richard Resch

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that it may raise sua sponte on appeal a claim of error not timely raised by the defendant where there was “a violation of the mandate rule.” The Court further held ...

by Richard Resch

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas held a trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke community supervision where the violation occurred after the statutory maximum term of five years concluded, despite the fact he had been sentenced to a 10-year term.

Before the Court was the writ ...

by Richard Resch

In a case involving an issue of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana erred by denying Russell Taylor’s motion to suppress and request for an evidentiary hearing to determine the ...

by Richard Resch

The Supreme Court of Colorado held that under Colorado Rule of Evidence (“CRE”) 106 if the prosecution creates a misleading impression by excluding statements made by the defendant that should be considered together with the proffered evidence out of fairness, the rule of completeness requires the ...

by Richard Resch

The Court of Appeals of New York ruled that the defendant (1) moving from the driver’s seat to the passenger’s seat, (2) positioning upper torso toward driver’s seat, (3) pulling pants up upon exiting vehicle, and (4) appearing nervous when questioned by police were insufficient to establish ...

by Richard Resch

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the prosecution violated its Brady disclosure obligations by withholding multiple law enforcement reports from the defendant, even though most of the information within the reports was available to the defendant from other sources, because the reports ...