What happens when a defendant who is on judicial diversion violates the terms of the diversion agreement? Off to prison to serve the original sentence? Not necessarily. The trial court retains considerable discretion in forming a remedy.[1]

Whether to accept or reject a plea offer is one of the decisions the client, rather than counsel, must make.[1] The criminal defense lawyer, however, faces a heavy responsibility to make sure that decision is made knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. Both the Tennessee Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court have noted ways in which counsel can fall short of providing constitutionally effective assistance of counsel during the pre-trial stages of criminal cases.

In a criminal case, can the opinion of one expert or technician come into evidence through the testimony of another expert?

Prosecutors and defense counsel who practice together regularly may take for granted the ability to have candid discussions about their cases without worrying about their statements being used against their clients in court. After all, we all know that such discussions are protected by state and federal rules of criminal procedure and evidence, right? Maybe not.

Even law-abiding citizens may find themselves detained by police for a traffic violation. By now it is clear that police officers may stop a motorist for any infraction of the rules of the road. The stop is valid even if the officer has used the traffic violation as a pretext for stopping the car.[1]

No matter how often we advise clients not to talk to anyone about their cases, sometimes it seems that clients who are in pre-trial custody cannot help discussing their cases on the phone. This fact is not lost on law enforcement. Recorded jail conversations have become a fruitful source of evidence for the prosecution.[1] Digital telephone technology makes it easy in many cases for law enforcement to pull all calls made by a particular inmate or to concentrate on calls made to a specific phone number.

Most of us are familiar with the fact that a trial court can enter a judgment of acquittal in both state and federal court if the prosecution fails to introduce sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The rule is set out in Rule 29 of both the Tennessee and Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The issue is how to make the motion mean something. To be successful, it should be more than just standing up to say that the prosecution’s proof failed.

My previous column discussed issues unique to corporate investigations. This month, let’s travel to general sessions courts, where many more people are likely to interact with the criminal justice system and for whom this will be the only court they ever see. For all those accused of committing an offense, a general sessions court preliminary hearing truly is a critical stage in a criminal proceeding. McKeldin v. State, 515 S.W.2d 82 (Tenn. 1974).

Corporate crime is big news. Lawyers practicing in Tennessee face an increasing likelihood of being asked to assist business clients in responding to an allegation of criminal wrongdoing. To protect the business and to avoid inadvertent harm to others (and your license), counsel must both understand the attorney-client privilege of an organization.