20-1
CHAPTER 20
COORDINATING THE
ATTACK IN TRIAL
I. GENERAL POINTS
§20:01 The Challenge of Drunk Driving Cases
§20:02 The Inside Information
§20:03 The Basic Problem
§20:04 The Basic Strategy
§20:05 Checklist for Coordinating the Attack
II. STEPS BEFORE TRIAL
A. General Points
§20:10 It’s a Deuce
§20:10.1 Try the Case with a Co-Counsel
§20:11 Prepare the Jury Instructions Before Trial
B. Create a Time Line
§20:20 Know the Facts
§20:21 Discover Problems With the Officer’s Investigation
§20:22 Engage the Jury
C. Visit the Scene
§20:30 Firsthand Knowledge Is Essential
§20:31 Check the Distances and Times
§20:32 Get the Client Involved
§20:33 Photograph the Scene
§20:34 Keep Opposing Witnesses Honest
§20:35 Judicial Notice and Internet Maps
D. Witness and Discovery Problems
§20:40 Exchanging Witness Lists
§20:41 Subpoenaing Witnesses
§20:42 Keep Your Expert Available
III. THE SCIENCE OF MAKING OBJECTIONS IN DUI CASES
A. General Points
§20:45 Basic Considerations
COORDINATING THE
ATTACK IN TRIAL
Attacking and Defending Drunk Driving Tests 20-2
COORDINATING THE
ATTACK IN TRIAL
§20:46 Rule Number One—Do You Want to Object?
§20:47 When to Make an Objection
§20:48 Federalize Your Objections
B. Recurring Objections
§20:50 Voir Dire
§20:51 Opening Statement
§20:52 Examination of the Police Officer
§20:53 Examination of the State’s Percipient Witnesses
§20:54 Examination of the Phlebotomist
§20:55 Examination of the State’s Criminalist
§20:56 Cross-Examination of Defense Percipient Witnesses
§20:57 Cross-Examination of the Defense Toxicologist
§20:58 The Defendant
§20:59 Closing Argument
C. The Confrontation Clause
§20:59.1 Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
§20:59.2 Michigan v. Bryant
§20:59.3 Bullcoming v. New Mexico
§20:59.4 The Fundamental Holding of Melendez-Diaz, Bryant & Bullcoming
§20:59.5 Key Quotes From Melendez-Diaz
§20:59.6 DUI Implications of Melendez-Diaz
§20:59.7 Williams v. Illinois
§20:59.8 Flow Chart for Confrontation Objections
D. Prosecutorial Misconduct
§20:.59.10 Attacking Defense Experts for Getting Paid
§20:.59.11 Attacking Defense Counsel
§20:.59.12 Commenting that Defense Counsel Knows the Client is Guilty
§20:.59.13 Vouching for Government Witnesses
§20:.59.14 Commenting on Defendant’s Failure to Testify
§20:.59.15 Minimizing Concept of Reasonable Doubt
§20:.59.16 Making and Preserving the Objection
§20:.59.17 Effect of Granting a Mistrial
IV. THE TRIAL
A. General Points
§20:60 The Pretrial Conference
§20:61 Be Likeable
§20:62 Dress the Client Appropriately
§20:63 Emphasize the Client’s Cooperation
§20:64 Keep it Simple
§20:65 Find a Villain
§20:66 Lay a Foundation and Present the Bad Fact Last
§20:67 Surround the Bad Fact With Good Facts
§20:68 Juxtapose the Bad Fact With Worse Facts
§20:69 Divert Attention From Bad Facts by Attacking
B. Opening Statements
§20:70 An Opening Statement Is a Necessity
§20:71 Get the Defendant’s Story Out
§20:72 Discuss the Driving Pattern and the Field Sobriety Tests
§20:73 Explain How the Breath or Blood Test Was Performed
§20:74 Tell the Jury the Result of the Blood Alcohol Test
§20:75 Make the Opening Statement a Defense Rebuttal
§20:76 Tell the Jury What You Want
20-3 Coordinating the Attack in Trial
COORDINATING THE
ATTACK IN TRIAL
C. Cross-Examining the State’s Witnesses
1. The Police Officer
a. General Points
§20:80 Begin With Good Points
§20:81 Sometimes Begin With the Hot Topic
§20:82 Sample Beginning Examination on the Hot Topic
§20:83 General Rules to Follow and to Avoid
§20:84 Some Different Angles on Police Reports
b. Questions to Ask Arresting Officers
§20:90 Academy Training
§20:91 Video Tape
§20:92 The Written ABC Test
§20:93 Time the Field Sobriety Test Instructions
§20:94 The Arresting Officer Needs Only Probable Cause
§20:95 Things Not in the Police Report
§20:96 Are You Sure?
§20:97 Examine the Arresting Officer’s Eyes
§20:98 Dealing With Claims of Weaving
§20:99 Cross-Examining Two Police Officers
§20:100 The Defendant Never Asked to Go to the Bathroom
2. The State’s Expert (Seven Step Method)
§20:110 General Points
§20:111 Step 1: The Expert’s Bias
§20:112 Step 2: The Expert’s Lack of Personal Knowledge
§20:113 Step 3: The Expert’s Lack of True Expertise
§20:114 Step 4: Ask Questions Beyond Legitimate Dispute
§20:115 Step 5: Show That Microscopic Measurements Were Made
§20:116 Step 6: Dismantle the Big Hypothetical
§20:117 Step 7: Attack the Widmark Calculations
3. The Screening Device Coordinator
§20:120 General Points
§20:121 Move to Suppress
§20:122 Object to References to the Calibration Solution
§20:123 Watch the Claim of the Calibration Solution Percentage
§20:124 Watch the Observation Period
§20:125 Note the Lack of a Slope Detector
§20:126 Ask for a Jury Instruction
4. Controlling the State’s Witnesses During Cross-Examination
§20:127 Anticipate Recalcitrant Witnesses
§20:128 Bartell’s Top 10 Tools To Control Witnesses
§20:128.1 Repeat the Question
§20:128.2 Ask the Question Again Slowly
§20:128.3 Ask the Question with Opposite Facts
§20:128.4 Offer to Rephrase the Question
§20:128.5 So Yes is Your Answer?
§20:128.6 Ask the Court Reporter to Read Back the Question
§20:128.7 Put Your Hand Up like a Stop Sign
§20:128.8 Address the Witness Formally
§20:128.9 Write the Question on the Chalkboard
§20:128.10 The Premeditated Poster
§20:129 Bartell’s Chart of Top 10 Tools to Control Witnesses
