Retrial Granted for the Murder of Chandra Levy

Photo Source: Wikipedia
Chandra Levy was an intern at the Federal Bureau of Prisons when she disappeared and was found a year later deceased in a park she was know to jog at. Levy was having an affair with married Californian Congressman, Gary Condit. Ingmar Guandique was convicted for her death, and was sentenced to 60 years in prison.

 The basis for the retrial is that Guandique's public defender believes that the conviction was based on a lie. He argued that Guandique's old cellmate, Armando Morales, who testified that Guandique confessed to the murder. The public defender is curious to why Morales withheld the information about the confession for such a long time. They also think that the prosecutors withheld evidence that may have proven Guandique's innocence.

Guandique's Public Defender attorneys argue that Guandique's conviction was a lie from Morales, so he could win favor with the prosecutors. The government did not tell the defense that Morales, a drug dealer and gang member, had cooperated with the prosecutors in other cases.

There were no eye witnesses, forensic evidence, or medical cause that linked Guandique to the murder. The conviction relied heavily on the testimony from Morales.

The prosecutors will most likely call Morales to the stand again, but the defense will probably have new instructions for the jurors stating something to the effect that Morales had perjured himself.

The retrial will include a new judge and a new jury.

Comments from Allen:
Prosecutors have a special role in the justice system unlike other attorneys.  They are not to be mere advocates for convictions, they are to advocate for justice.  That means when they have strong evidence their star witness is a liar, they are duty-bound to refrain from putting that witness on the stand, or at a minimum, they must inform the defense in  advance of trial of all the evidence that can be used to impeach the credibility of their witness.

If a prosecutor fails to do this, he has committed "prosecutorial misconduct," and if the misconduct arguably resulted in the defense being unable to cross examine the witness effectively, a new trial must be granted.

Sometimes the failure to provide the evidence to the defense is intentional, sometimes inadvertent.  Intentionally failing to provide evidence relevant to a defense is grounds for disbarring a prosecutor and retrying the defendant.  Inadvertent failure is grounds for a new trial.

From my experience, prosecutions based on the testimony of a "snitch" are often suspect.  The jury does not understand, sometimes, that the snitch may be gaining some kind of favor from the state by giving testimony of a confession, or by dragging innocent people into the ring of conspirators.  I have seen it happen.

Guandique Photo Source: Jacquelyn Martin, AP
In the case of Mr. Guandique, who knows if he is innocent or guilty?  I don't.  But were I his defense attorney, I certainly would have wanted to know, as the prosecutor knew, that the snitch in this case was a career criminal who had managed to gain some kind of favor with prosecutors in the past by giving testimony on behalf of the state.

How many times can a person stumble upon key evidence in unrelated criminal prosecutions, or happen to overhear various people confess to unrelated crimes?  It could happen, but it tends to cast significant doubt upon the truthfulness of the snitch in Mr. Guandique's case.

It is rare that a judge will grant a new trial after the time for appeals has run.  Kudos to this judge for doing the right thing and allowing this man a chance to present a real defense.


***********************************************************************************************************************

Allen Browning is an attorney in Idaho Falls, Idaho who handles personal injury and criminal defense. He has over 30 years of experience and handled thousands of cases. Allen work with cases from all over Idaho. Call (208) 542-2700 to set up a free consultation if you are facing legal trouble or you have been involved in an accident.

Also, check out browninglaw.net for more information about Allen and Browning Law.

Allen Browning can help with all personal injury claims including motor vehicle accidents, serious and disabling accidents, and wrongful death claims. Allen Browning is an attorney who can also help with drunk driving (DUI) , Felony, Misdemeanor, Domestic Violence, Drug Crimes, Theft, Juvenile Crimes, Violent Crimes, and Probation/Parole Violations. He is one of the most experienced and successful criminal defense attorneys in Idaho.


Attorney Allen Browning can help with all personal injury claims including motor vehicle accidents, serious and disabling accidents, and wrongful death claims.


 Sources for more information:

http://www.courtchatter.com/#!DC-judge-grants-retrial-in-2001-killing-of-intern-Chandra-Levy/c1oiw/557060840cf2e4994faece1e

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/04/chandra-levy-convict-retrial/28467081/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/dc-judge-grants-re-trial-in-2001-killing-of-intern-chandra-levy/2015/06/04/0a282286-09fd-11e5-a7ad-b430fc1d3f5c_story.html?tid=sm_tw

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

7 Things Lawyers Can't Tell Jurors

Image
 It is a trial lawyer's job to educate jurors, and tell them what they need to know in order to decide cases. Despite this, there are many things, true things, that lawyers are not allowed to tell jurors directly in statements to the jury or indirectly through testimony of their witnesses. Lawyers know these things, though, and I thought you might like to know some of things. #1. A lawyer can't tell the jurors anything that happened during settlement negotiations. He cannot let the jurors know, when asking them to make the defendant pay his client $100,000 that the defendant agreed to pay him $80,000 prior to the trial. The reason for this is that you want settlement negotiations to be very open. You don't want to damage a negotiation session because someone is afraid that what they say will get repeated to a jury if you don't strike a deal. #2 In Idaho, a lawyer can't tell the jurors that the defendant has insurance. In many other states, he can. Bec...
Read more

OBAMA APPOINTEE DENIES GIULIANI ABILITY TO DEFEND HIMSELF, RESULTS IN $148 MILLION JUDGMENT

Image
In the aftermath of the January 6, 2021 protests, Rudy Giuliani has been ordered to pay over $148 million in damages to two Georgia election workers named by the former New York mayor.  What has not been explained to the general public is that there was never any trial concerning whether Mr. Giuliani had actually slandered or libeled these two persons.   In the case of Giuliani, the two Georgia election workers listed as plaintiffs in the suit against Giuliani sued him for saying they engaged in what amounted to election fraud.  They are allowed to ask the defendant ex-mayor for documents relevant to their suit and to his defense. These women brought their case against Giuliani in a jurisdiction that is heavily populated with Democrats.  They could have sued in their home state, Georgia, but did not. They wanted a jury pool of anti-Trump democrats, so they sued in Washington, D.C. They managed to get an incredibly biased Barack Obama-appointed, anti-Trump judge....
Read more

Man Framed by Prosecutor Released After 29 Years in Prison Seeking Lawsuit

Image
19 year old, Charise Kamps, was found raped and strangled to death in her apartment in June 1980. Ralph Armstrong told the police that both of them were at the apartment alone doing cocaine before leaving to go see friends around 9:30 pm. Police said that they learned that Armstrong owed Kamp's boyfriend $400 and witnesses saw Armstrong handing Kamps money that night. However, the money was not found in the apartment, and Armstrong deposited $315 in his bank the next day.The defense argued that he got the money from his brother. One of the neighbors saw a lean, muscular man about 5 feet 5 inches tall with long, dark hair drive up to the apartment. Before the identification process, the police had the witness hypnotized. He was shown a photograph of Armstrong, and After being hypnotized, the witness changed the height of the man he saw. Later at a lineup to have the witness select the man he saw, he chose Armstrong. The other people in the lineup were police officers in wigs...
Read more