The Court of Appeals in Maddux v. D.C, decided on July 25, 2019, considered whether the defendant should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea to DUI after sentencing. Before sentencing the burden on the defendant is “a fair and just reason” while after sentencing the burden elevated to “to correct manifest injustice, that is, justice demands withdrawal in the circumstances of the individual case. Maddux’s central argument was that the Magistrate Judge pushed and coerced plea bargaining by threatening to detain him pending trial and pre-trial while making clear he would be treated as a first-time offender with a
Read More
Monthly Archives July 2019
APPELLATE PROCESS IN THE FAMILY CASES
In most family cases, the litigation does not and should not end by the Associate Judge or the Magistrate Judge’s final ruling. As these cases are not jury demandable, often times the assigned Judge may issue multiple rulings, including final decree of divorce, division of property, alimony and child support as well as the physical and legal custody of the children. Significant and life altering decisions and all by a single Judge who may be subjectively objective. And although most family judges are experienced, fair and equitable in dispensing decisions well supported in fact and law – there are cases
Read More
BALLISTIC IMAGING EVIDENCE — DISPOSITIVE? NOT EXACTLY …
The Court of in Williams v. U.S., decided on June 27, 2019, reiterated the legal standard for admissibility and reliability of the ballistic scientific evidence. Williams was convicted of felony murder and one of key pieces of evidence against him was a testimony of the ballistic expert who had matched the toolmarks of a weapon found in the defendant’s home against the bullet shells found at the crime scene. The expert at trial had testified with certainty that the ballistic imaging was a 100 percent match. The Court of Appeals held that there was a lack of scientific data to
Read More
DC CHILD SUPPORT & STATUTE OF LIMITATION
The Court of Appeals in Massey v. Massey, decided on June 20, 2019, highlighted statute of limitation on child support payments. Massey who owed over several thousand dollars of arrears in child support had petitioned the court for his support payment to be erased relying on the “Debt Statute of Limitations”. The Court of Appeal affirming the lower court decision ruled that essentially the debt of child support in arrears would be erased after the twelve year statutory period from the last payments due. Specifically, support payments constitute judgment debts as each installment becomes due and payable. As such, the
Read More