David Serna Explains The Constitutional Right Against Double Jeopardy

David Serna believes that not many know about their constitutional right against double jeopardy, which is a must-know for every individual. This right means that the state cannot charge an acquitted person twice for the same offense. It is one of the fundamental protections provided by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for criminal defendants.

David Serna believes that it is essential for criminal defense lawyers to thoroughly explain every crucial aspect of their right against double jeopardy to their clients. One of the vital things they need to discuss is its obvious application when law enforcement finds new evidence of the defendant’s guilt after the jury acquitted them. The prosecution cannot charge the defendant again. Double jeopardy is also apparent when a judge tries to sentence a defendant for an offense they have already served their sentence.

But, David Serna believes that double jeopardy can be much more complex in certain circumstances. The court may order a new trial if there was a hung jury or there is new compelling evidence previously unavailable at the first trial. Additionally, the court may also order a new trial suppose the prosecution finds a tainted acquittal where there was intimidation of jury or witnesses, false evidence, or any form of corruption or bribery at the first trial. These two circumstances typically apply to the most serious offenses such as murder, manslaughter, or aggravated rape. It is why David Serna reminds his colleagues to do their best in their work without participating in any illegal acts, which can further damage the defendant’s case.

However, David Serna believes it is essential to remember that the protection against double jeopardy applies only to criminal cases. It means that other parties may sue an acquitted or convicted defendant in a civil lawsuit based on the same conduct. Additionally, double jeopardy does not apply until the court swears in the jury or until the first witness starts to testify in a trial before a judge. Therefore, filing charges does not trigger the rule.

If you need any legal assistance, David Serna is available for consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. You can reach him via email, telephone, video conferencing, and in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and mask requirements.

David Serna Explains The Presumption of Innocence

 Are you familiar with the saying “innocent until proven guilty”? Did you know that it refers to a principle of criminal law known as the presumption of innocence? David Serna believes that it is essential for law enforcement officials and prosecutors always to keep this principle in mind. Doing so will help eliminate any prejudices or biases one may have against a suspect.

 

The presumption of innocence is a criminal law principle that presumes that a person is innocent until proven otherwise. David Serna believes that it is essential for lawyers to keep in their minds that even if there are charges against a person with the offense in question, it does not mean that they are guilty. It means that no one can punish them until the evidence shows they are guilty and a judge gives them a sentence.

 

David Serna also believes that trials should always occur without undue delay, given the impact of criminal proceedings on a defendant’s life. It is why before conviction, under the principle of the presumption of innocence, any restrictions on the accused individual’s fundamental rights should only be imposed where necessary.

 

The presumption of innocence is also a fundamental element of an individual’s right to a fair trial. David Serna reminds prosecutors and law enforcement officers that they cannot, in any way, compel the defendant to confess guilt or give evidence against self. The defendant does not have the burden of proving his innocence. Therefore, the state cannot use their silence as evidence of guilt.

 

In many countries, this principle is a legal right of the accused, which David Serna believes should be for every country. It is also an international human right under the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Huma Rights, Article 11. If the prosecution wants a conviction, they need to prove that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, backed by the legal burden of proof. If reasonable doubt remains, the state must give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and be acquitted because the state did not meet the burden of proof.

David Serna Talks About The Objectives of Criminal Law

Criminal law is the body of law related to crime and proscribes conduct perceived as threatening, harmful, or otherwise endangering to people’s welfare. David Serna believes that one of the most significant definitions of criminal law is its aim to identify, acknowledge, and punish and educate the greater community and potential offenders about their actions’ consequences.

 

People commit crimes every second worldwide, and many may wonder why people commit these offenses despite knowing that there are existing criminal laws that can provide punishment. Some people may even wonder what criminal law’s objective is if there is always someone violating others’ rights. Essentially, there are five criminal law objectives, and David Serna shares an overview of all of them in this post.

 

Retribution

Retribution refers to the judgment of sentencing of the court, delivering punishment for an offense. A trial determines the penalty, which usually takes away certain liberties and rights of the offender. David Serna believes that it is the most widely seen goal of criminal law. Criminals inflicted harm upon others, and consequently, the law will punish them and balance the scales once again.

 

Deterrence

Another primary objective of criminal law is deterrence. David Serna believes that the goal is to impose sufficient penalties to discourage offenders from criminal behavior and other society members from committing crimes. Serna trusts the authorities can only achieve deterrence when offenders have the chance to reflect on their actions’ consequences.

 

Incapacitation

Incapacitation or incarceration restricts an offender’s freedoms and rights as punishment for their crimes. It removes them from society and restrains them in a separate facility. David Serna believes that this objective helps prevent criminals from committing any further crimes and protect the general public from them.

 

Rehabilitation

David Serna believes that criminal law is not only about punishing offenders. It is also about transforming them into valuable society members, which is the goal of rehabilitation. It prevents further offense by identifying and addressing issues of the offender and redirect them for a positive outcome.

 

Restoration

Lastly, criminal law also aims to return the crime victim to their original position before the injury. It is a victim-based punishment, which seeks for criminals to accept accountability for their actions.

David Serna Explains the Pros and Cons of Pleading Guilty

 When criminal defense lawyers like David Serna makes the critical decision of whether to plead guilty or go to trial, they often have more factors to consider. They need to understand and explain carefully to their clients what trial rights they are giving up. In this post, David Serna will explain some of the pros and cons of pleading guilty.

 

Pros of pleading guilty:

Waiting for case trials can take up to a year or more. The defense attorneys, especially their clients, will have to wait anxiously, not knowing how the trial will favor them. But David Serna believes that when criminal defense lawyers plead guilty, they know that they will be confronting the case face-on. Meaning, they should resolve the case more quickly than if they waited for a criminal trial.

 

Besides the agonizing months of waiting for a trial, it can also cost a lot. The expense for defense lawyers is generally less when the defendant chooses to plead guilty instead of going to trial. David Serna believes that saving thousands of dollars should be one of the greatest consideration for someone who anticipates the jury to find them guilty.

 

David Serna believes that one of the best advantages of pleading guilty is avoiding a trial’s uncertainty. Juries are usually unpredictable, and prosecutors can always uncover additional evidence to convince the jury to convict the defendant. Since trials are public, pleading guilty will help the defendant avoid most media attention and unwanted attention.

 

Cons of pleading guilty:

Although there are excellent advantages in pleading guilty, David Serna believes that some risks are associated with it. The criminal record will follow the defendant for the rest of their life. Besides this consequence, the judge is still responsible for sentencing. They can generally impose a longer sentence compared to what the prosecutor suggests.

 

If you need any legal advice, you can reach lawyer David Serna, a nationally-recognized criminal defense lawyer, via email, telephone, video conferencing, or in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and mask requirements.

 

David Serna Talks about the Role of Lawyers in Settlements

In some cases, parties feel shocked or dismayed when their legal counsel encourages them to settle instead of going through all procedures until trial. Some wonder if their lawyers are not skillful enough to win the case or if they lost faith in the entire case. It is why David Serna believes that it is essential to discuss settlements and the lawyer’s role in it. Lawyers should adequately guide their clients to prevent them from having misapprehensions, which can have disastrous effects.

David Serna believes that a settlement does not necessarily mean that anyone was right or wrong, nor does it have to settle the entire case. However, criminal cases have a different arrangement. The government or a court may decide to dismiss a case. The defendant may also plead guilty, which may dismiss some of the charges or shorten the sentence.

Settling cases can have advantages, such as:
● The client can save a significant amount of money from legal costs if you settle before the hearing.
● It will give the involved parties a chance to decide what they are willing to accept. It can also take the risk out of the case.
● Settlements will also help avoid the stress of giving evidence undergoing cross-examination.
A legal counsel cannot, in any case, suggest a tie. Instead, David Serna believes that good lawyers will explore reasonable settlement resolutions and give their clients an accurate and full cost-benefit analysis of the available alternative options. Lawyers need to explain to their clients carefully and as extensively as possible to understand why they are even considering settling. David Serna believes that good lawyers will argue their case as strongly as possible. But the best lawyers will discuss both sides equally well. They should know that understanding the opponents’ arguments is as vital as understanding their case, which will give them an insight into why they should settle or not.

However, it would be best to keep in mind that you cannot or should settle all cases. Sometimes, the amount or agreement may be too little or unrealistically big. If you need any legal advice, you can reach David Serna, a nationally-recognized criminal defense lawyer, via email, telephone, video conferencing, or in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and mask requirements.

David Serna Shares Tips On What To Do If You Get Arrested

David Serna believes it is vital that you know what will get you in trouble and get you arrested first before they learn the next essential things to do. Law enforcement officers may charge you:

●     if they are present, and someone accuses you of committing a crime;

●     if someone accuses you of committing a crime that falls under the exception of warrantless arrests, such as battery;

●     if in pursuant of a warrant, a judge summons you to court

 

David Serna believes that one of the essential things individuals need to remember is that they should not speak to law enforcement officers without talking to their attorney first. If the individual does not have a defense attorney, they have the right to immediately ask for a legal counsel.

 

Under the 5^th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, even if the police threatens you or you are afraid that you may appear guilty, you should never agree to answer any of their questions or make any uncounseled statements. After getting arrested, David Serna believes it is best if you concentrate on protecting your rights. Explain to the law enforcement officers that you will not provide any information until you have spoken to an attorney.

 

After a lawful arrest, police officers usually have the right to conduct a limited warrantless police search of your person and property. This process, known as search incident to arrest, ensures the officers’ safety, and determines whether you have any contraband material. David Serna believes that it is best to avoid physically resisting to avoid any conflict with the law enforcement officers. Make sure to pay careful attention to how the police officers conduct their search. Remain calm, physically compliant, and silent. Make sure that you do not make any statements that suggest you committed an offense.

 

If you need any legal assistance, David Serna is available for consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. You can reach him via email, telephone, video conferencing, and in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and masks requirements.

David Serna: Everything You Need To Know About Miranda Rights

 

“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”

 

As all of us see on television shows or movies, whenever officers arrest someone, they immediately recite the suspect's Miranda rights. Unlike what many believe, David Serna reminds us that if a police offer does not read your rights and obtained evidence from you may be inadmissible as evidence in court.

 

What are Miranda rights?

More accurately known as Miranda warning, Miranda rights were made as a part of the common vernacular after the U.S. Supreme Court of Miranda vs. Arizona. In this case, the Supreme Court decided that all suspects must be immediately advised of their rights. David Serna believes that this is crucial for suspected individuals since every action or word they say may significantly affect their legal proceedings. David Serna also reminds individuals that the location of interrogation does not matter. Whether it occurred in jail, the streets, at the scene of the crime, or even in a car, the police must read the Miranda rights to the person if they want to use the person's responses as evidence. However, if the person is not in police custody as he or she makes admissions, then the information can be used against the person later on legal proceedings.

 

It is vital to note that officers recite the individual's Miranda rights if there is an intention to interrogate the suspected individual under custody. However, the police can still arrest the suspect without the Miranda warning. David Serna believes that whatever may happen, suspected individuals must invoke their Miranda rights. Before or during the interrogation, tell the police that you would want to stay silent until your attorney arrives. If you need any legal assistance, David Serna is available for consultations during COVID. Either by email, telephone, video conferencing, and in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and masks requirements.