OJ Simpson is trying for a “Hail Mary” Motion for a New Trial
As we all know OJ Simpson is currently serving a prison sentence from 9 to 33 years in a Nevada State Prison. All of Simpson’s appeals have been denied.
However, in typical OJ “never say die” style Mr. Simpson’s new lawyers have filed for a “writ of habeas corpus” asking that he be granted a motion for a new trial based upon “incompetence of counsel”
OJ is claiming that his trial attorney Yale Galanter provided him inadequate legal representation for many reasons. He has included in his list of reasons:
1) Failing to halt the admission of damaging evidence, which was a tape recording of the incident
2) Never informing Simpson of the prosecutors plea bargain offer
3) Refusing to allow OJ to testify at his trial
4) Failure to do proper investigation to assist Simpson’s defense
5) A claim, that Galanter had a conflict of interest because he had approved Simpson’s plan to retrieve the family photos, footballs, trophies and other personal belongings as long as no one trespassed and no force was used
The judge in Nevada who received OJ’s written writ of habeas corpus petition felt that it had sufficient merit to warrant a full blown hearing. A hearing is taking place before Clark County District Court Judge Linda Marie Bell to determine if the judge believes that in fact Mr. Simpson was denied a fair trial due to the nature of the legal representation he was provided. The hearing is expected to last a week.
If in fact the judge grants Mr. Simpson’s request then he will be entitled to a new trial. While few such motions are granted this may be a case where the judge might consider doing so depending upon the testimony provided during the hearings which began on May 13, 2013. There are many reasons a judge could grant a new trial in this case, depending upon what the judge believes.
An Accused Has the Absolute Right to Testify At His Trial
It is well settled law that if an accused person wishes to testify at his trial it is his choice, “and his choice alone” to make that decision. While a criminal defense lawyer might advise against his client testifying ultimately if a client wishes to testify at his trial he must be allowed to do so. If Mr. Simpson can prove to the court that he made clear to his criminal defense attorney, Yale Galanter that he wanted to testify and Galanter refused to put him on the stand this could be sufficient for the court to grant him a new trial.
A Lawyer Must Do All Investigation That Could Be Helpful To His Client
It is critical that when you represent a person accused of a crime, you make certain that you do all investigation that could assist your client in winning his case. In OJ Simpson’s case there were taped conversations that were admitted at his trial that were part of the case presented against him. The jurors likely considered these tapes in reaching their guilty verdicts. If it is true, that the defense failed to retain experts to examine the tapes to see if they were in some way “doctored” then this could lead to serious questions as to the quality of representation provided to Mr. Simpson at his trial.
A Lawyer Has an Obligation to Advice His Client of All Plea Bargains Offered By the Prosecution
If the prosecution makes an offer to settle a criminal case, the criminal defense attorney for the accused has an ethical obligation to convey that offer to his client. The judge in this case will have to decide if such an offer was made to Mr. Simpson by the prosecution and if so, was Mr. Simpson advised of this offer. This will be another interesting factual determination Judge Linda Marie Bell will have to make in deciding on Mr. Simpson’s current motion.
Any defendant who brings a writ of habeas corpus faces an “uphill battle”. Very few of these motions are granted. However, Mr. Simpson has been up against “long odds” in the past. As we all recall in 1995, OJ was facing what appeared to be overwhelming evidence against him when he was accused of murdering his wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman in Los Angeles. This trial was probably the most highly publicized criminal trial in a generation. The jury in that criminal case found a way to find Mr. Simpson not guilty.
However, in a subsequent civil trial filed by the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, Simpson was found liable for civil damages of $33.5 million finding that OJ was in fact responsible for the death of both persons. Since that verdict Mr. Simpson has taken all steps possible to prevent the plaintiffs in that case from collecting on this judgment.
His 2008 conviction stems from an incident where Simpson lead five men in the armed robbery of two sports memorabilia dealers in a Las Vegas hotel room in 2007. Simpson’s defense argued he was merely trying to recover property that was rightfully his.
The bottom line is if you are accused of a serious crime you need to do your homework when you are first arrested. You need to select a criminal defense law firm that has years of experience fighting for their clients freedom.
At Wallin & Klarich, we have over 40 years of experience successfully helping our clients defend their legal rights through every step of the criminal process. You cannot afford to fight your case alone. Your Wallin & Klarich attorney will work hard to fight for your freedom.
Our offices are conveniently located in Orange County, Los Angeles, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Victorville, Ventura, West Covina, Sherman Oaks, and Torrance. Call us today at (877) 4-NO-JAIL or (877) 466-5245. We will be there when you call.
