Blocking Evidence in Philadelphia Criminal Cases with Motions

Blocking Evidence in Philly Criminal Cases—Motions that Get Results

Facing criminal charges in Philadelphia? Evidence can make or break a case, so keeping damaging evidence out is key. This article breaks down different motions your Philly criminal defense lawyer can file to block prejudicial evidence.

Motions in Limine—Blocking Evidence Before Trial

Motions in limine are pretrial motions to exclude certain evidence. They prevent juries from ever hearing potentially unfair evidence that could bias them.

Philly judges usually rule on these motions before trial starts. So if granted, the questionable evidence stays out. No need to object when the prosecutor tries introducing it mid-trial.

Defense lawyers often file motions in limine when the admissibility of evidence seems borderline. For instance, your lawyer may try blocking:

• Prior convictions—especially if too old, dissimilar to current charges, or overly prejudicial
• Incriminating statements you made before receiving Miranda warnings
• Unscientific expert testimony lacking factual foundation
• Gruesome crime scene photos that shock more than inform
• Unqualified witnesses offering speculative opinions
• Hearsay from non-testifying witnesses that violates confrontation rights

The key is convincing the judge that admitting the evidence risks unfair prejudice. Your lawyer must explain how letting jurors hear the evidence could improperly sway them.

Suppression Motions—Attacking Illegally Obtained Evidence

Suppression motions challenge evidence gathered illegally, in violation of your constitutional rights. They aim to keep out evidence like:

• Statements taken during custodial interrogation without Miranda warnings
• Evidence seized during warrantless vehicle or home searches lacking probable cause
• Eyewitness identifications tainted by unnecessarily suggestive police procedures
• Cell phone data obtained without a warrant
• Confessions coerced through police misconduct/intimidation
• Blood evidence drawn without consent or a warrant after a DUI arrest

Your lawyer must prove police violated laws/procedures when gathering the evidence. If successful, the judge suppresses (blocks) the evidence, keeping it away from the jury.

404(b) Motions—Excluding Evidence of Other Crimes

Under Rule 404(b), evidence of prior convictions or wrongs normally stays out. Such evidence risks unfair prejudice by suggesting you have a criminal propensity.

But prosecutors can introduce 404(b) evidence for other purposes—to prove motive, intent, identity, etc. So defense lawyers often file motions in limine to exclude such evidence as overly prejudicial.

For instance, if charged with theft, they’d try keeping out prior shoplifting convictions. Or if defending drug charges, they may seek to exclude evidence of past dealing.

Objections—Blocking Evidence Mid-Trial

Motions in limine don’t always succeed. When questionable evidence gets admitted over defense objections pre-trial, smart lawyers also object when prosecutors introduce it at trial.

Objections like “unfair prejudice,” “irrelevant,” and “hearsay” can keep evidence from reaching jurors’ ears mid-trial. Making timely objections preserves issues for appeal too.

Skilled trial attorneys stay alert for chances to object to unfavorable testimony or exhibits. Keeping damaging evidence out of the record limits how much it can influence the verdict.

Carefully Crafted Motions—Your Best Shot

Motions targeting unfairly prejudicial, illegally obtained, or improper evidence offer the best chance to avoid wrongful convictions. But they require thoroughly researched, persuasively written legal arguments explaining precisely why the court should exclude the evidence.

Philly criminal defense lawyers know how vital motions can be. Connect with an experienced local attorney to craft motions giving you the best shot at a not guilty verdict by blocking the most incriminating evidence. Don’t leave the outcome to chance—skilled legal advocacy can make all the difference.