Appellate attorney Dennis P. Riordan confers with his client*****BREAKING NEWS*****
March 10, 2010
Imprisoned music producer Phillip Spector has just filed his long awaited Opening Brief on Appeal (“AOB”)—all 164 pages of it!
This brief is the foundation for the music producer’s bid for a reversal of his second degree murder conviction and for a new trial.
We are reading and analyzing Spector’s AOB as we speak, and we will be posting our analysis early next week.
Many thanks to top notch Phillip Spector appellate counsel Dennis P. Riordan, who was kind enough to provide us with an electronic copy of the AOB for our review. (It is always a treat to read a brief filed by the venerable Riordan & Horgan.)
We note from the cover page of the AOB that Mr. Riordan’s co-counsel in the matter is famed criminal appellate attorney Chuck Savilla of San Diego, California.
Now that is an appellate dream team!
Stay tuned, because from here on out it gets very interesting.
10 comments:
Based on our very preliminary review of Spector’s AOB, after tacitly setting the stage factually for the appellate court to conclude that the evidence was close enough that any error should not be written off as “harmless”, Spector’s counsel raise four core issues on appeal:
1. Prejudicial statements, facial expressions and gestures that he trial judge made throughout the trial that amount to “testimony” and deprived Spector of a fair trial;
2. The erroneous prejudicial admission of prior uncharged gun brandishing incidents that deprived Spector of a fair trial;
3. Errors by the trial judge when instructing the jury on the proper inferences that they may draw from the evidence of prior uncharged gun brandishing incidents;
4. Prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct during the trial and closing arguments that caused justice to miscarry.
Stay tuned.
We will have more comment and analysis of the AOB next week
Please note that Spector’s appellate team is particularly strong and very experienced.
Thank you very, very much. Every day is a day closer to freedom for Phillip Spector.
Not to be a thorn in your side, but may I ask what type of attorney are you, from what point of view will you be giving your analysis? Thank you and thanks for the updates.
It's a fair question.
I am a trial lawyer who has jury tried in excess of 100 civil and criminal cases to verdict as sole trial counsel for my client.
I have extensive civil and criminal appellate experience as well.
While there was a time when my practice consisted of 75% criminal trial work, for the last 15 years of my 32 year practice I have handled one or two white collar criminal cases for civil clients and their family members every couple of years.
My practice is now 98% civil trial work, including plaintiff's legal malpractice and malicious prosecution, real estate contract and fraud cases, real estate secured transactions, commercial landlord tenant,and commercial disputes of all kinds.
But mainly I view myself as a teial lawyer well versed in the appellate issues raised on appeal in the Spector matter--at the trial level and on appeal.
Judges are human and sometimes make mistakes--which does not entitle an appealing litigant to a new trial unless there is a miscarriage of justce.
That is the perspective I bring to this subject.
Thank's for asking.
Could Phil win an appeal and get out of jail merely based on Judge Fidler's facial expressions?
No.
However, we have just finished our analysis of Phil Spector's first (of three)arguments on appeal, and the issue relates not to facial expressions but instead to a Court TV video shown the the jury in trial #2. See our latest post tonight which lays it all out.
http://blogonaut-blogonaut.blogspot.com/2010/03/spector-appeal-trial-judge-improperly.html
Love your blog. Also, I love the article on the Phil Spector appeal.
He should be a free man.
Spectorfan8
Unlike the Natzi-esque IS message boards, all points of view are welcomed here.
For those of you closely following the Spector appeal, the Attorney General's Respondent's brief is still due on 06/08/2010.
Further extensions to file are anticipated.
Stay tuned here for the latest developments as they happen.
As expected, the AG filed an additional request for extension of time to file its Respondent's Brief today (July 8). There is no ruling yet, but it will be granted for at least another 30 days.
Painful we know, but the wheels of appellate justice move very slowly indeed.
Stay tuned here for the latest developments and analysis.
Post a Comment