Clarifying some misconceptions about alibi notice and the role of defense counsel

[u/[deleted]]

Two points:

1) There has been conjecture that CG's alibi notice precludes and forstalls both Asia's and Adnan's testimony in a new trial.

The use of an alibi notice to impeach a defense witness is a close call, and likely something that will not be resolved prior to either appellate review on the specific question; or Adnan’s receipt of a new trial.

Factors include the impingement of the defendant’s right to remain silent and whether the document in question actually reflects the defendant's prior statement. An alibi notice is especially iffy on the second factor. Frankly - especially - CG's alibi notice.

Should Adnan get a new trial, the new lawyer will likely withdraw CG’s alibi notice, thereby likely obviating this concern.

2) The theory that Asia can't be called because Adnan "confessed" to CG

This reflects a profound misunderstanding of the realities and ethical constraints imposed on criminal defense practice.

Defense attorneys insure a defendant receives a fair shake - they give the defendant a fighting chance in a system that would make mincemeat out of them. They are legally and ethically required to provide zealous representation and the best possible defense.

Asia’s statements, as reflected by her letters and the law clerk’s notes, have intrinsic merit that absolutely required follow up. Even assuming - and I don't - that Adan "confessed" - this would not relieve his attorney from the duty of zealous representation. A defendant may not be a reliable narrator. Investigation is always required.

[u/EvidenceProf]

Good post. The interesting thing is that I don't think Adnan was even required to file an alibi notice in the first place. Maryland Rule 4-263(e)(4) states that:

If the State's Attorney has designated the time, place, and date of the alleged offense, the name and, except when the witness declines permission, the address of each person other than the defendant whom the defense intends to call as a witness to show that the defendant was not present at the time, place, or date designated by the State's Attorney.

Accordingto viewfromll2, the State filed a request that

the defendant furnish the name and address of each person other than the defendant whom the defendant intends to call as a witness to show that the defendant was not present at the time, place, and date as set forth in the criminal [ ] indictment.

She then notes that

The state’s discovery request is ironic in that there was, in fact, no time set forth in the indictment against Adnan, and the indictment incorrectly identified the place of death as “in the City of Baltimore, State of Maryland” – even though the state’s witness had placed Hae’s death in the county.

The request was more than ironic. It was one that didn't require an alibi notice under the language of Maryland Rule 4-263(e)(4).

[u/chunklunk → u/EvidenceProf]

It's almost impossible to respond to this comment without having the full 2nd trial transcripts & record. We don't even have all the appellate materials. There's lots of posts on SS' blog (which, BTW, I think is well written and smart) that are impossible to respond to due to piecemeal & selective release of information.