Maybe your client is guilty. Maybe it will be easy for the State to prove that your client is guilty. That is, if they can get their witnesses to show up.
There are all sorts of reasons that defense lawyers set cases for hearings and trials, not the least of which is that they expect(well… hope?) that a judge will suppress some or all of the evidence, or that a jury will find their client not guilty.
Occasionally a client will even volunteer this as the solution to their problems, “What are the chances that so-and-so won’t show up, and my case will be dismissed?”
For now, I’ll ignore the ethical issues that answering that question raises, and focus on one small aspect of it. The answer depends greatly on whether or not the witness against your client is a police officer or a civilian. The chances of winning witness chicken when the only folks the State needs wear a badge and a gun are substantially less than if they don’t. Part of every cop’s job description includes “professional witness,” and they even take classes to learn how to do it.
So what are the chances that an officer won’t show up to testify in a pretrial suppression hearing? Usually pretty slight. But a cynic might say there are other factors to consider, such as… what your client does for a living. Is the answer different if your client is also part of the thin blue line?
An Hidalgo County judge killed a McAllen policeman's criminal case after one of the defendant's fellow officers failed to appear in court and testify against him, court records state.
Judge Jay Palacios of Hidalgo County Court-at-law No. 2 dealt a "fatal" blow to the prosecution's case, Hidalgo County District Attorney Rene Guerra said, when he granted a motion to suppress evidence in Officer Alex Alvarez's pending case on a charge of driving while intoxicated.
No witness, evidence suppressed, case closed. Until the newspaper called, and the D.A. had to come up with an explanation.
District Attorney Guerra said he learned Wednesday that the case was set for dismissal when a Monitor reporter contacted him about the matter. Guerra said he would ask Palacios to reconsider his decision to suppress the evidence in the case.
"Legally, I don't know if he can reconsider it," the district attorney said. "I don't know until I try."
But why the arresting officer missed the court date remains unclear.
Did the state even ask for a continuance? According to the article, “McAllen's Police Chief Rodriguez said he believed the officer was hospitalized.” In Austin, prosecutors will ask for a continuance at a first setting, even if they have no idea why their witness isn’t there, and it will usually be granted. One time any way.
Did that happen in this case? And if it regularly happens in that court, but didn’t this time, what made this case different from any other?