Wallace Bradsher Trial Day 7 Part 4 Motions Hearing

TL;DR

Defendant presents a motion to dismiss based on insufficiency of evidence, lack of notice, and constitutional violations.

Transcript

first I'd like to make the standard motion to dismiss based on insufficiency of the evidence as to all seven counts and contend that the state is failed to meet its burden with regards to sufficient evidence on each element of each crime with all seven counts and I'd like to address that your honor count by count if I could yes mm-hmm the first cou... Read More

Key Insights

• 🤨 The defendant contests the sufficiency of evidence and lack of notice in each count, raising concerns about due process.
• 🈂️ The defendant argues that there is no evidence of an agreement in the conspiracy charge, undermining the validity of the charges.
• 🖤 Lack of evidence for specific false representations in counts two and three undermines the obtaining property by false pretenses charges.

Questions & Answers

Q: What is the defendant's main argument for dismissing the charges?

The defendant argues that the state has failed to provide sufficient evidence and notice for each element of the charges, thereby violating the defendant's constitutional rights.

Q: What specific charge does the defendant challenge?

The defendant challenges the conspiracy charge, arguing that there is no evidence of an agreement between the defendant and the co-conspirators to obtain property by false pretenses.

Q: What evidence does the defendant claim is lacking in counts two and three?

The defendant argues that there is a lack of evidence to support the specific false representation element in counts two and three of obtaining property by false pretenses.

Q: What is the basis for the defendant's request for a mistrial?

The defendant requests a mistrial based on concerns about due process violations, particularly the repeated references to the defendant's right to testify or not, which may influence the jury's perception.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Defendant argues that the state has failed to meet its burden of providing sufficient evidence for each element of the seven counts.

• Defendant challenges the conspiracy charge, arguing that there is no evidence of an agreement between the defendant and the co-conspirators to obtain property by false pretenses.

• Defendant questions the specific false representation element in counts two and three of obtaining property by false pretenses, arguing that there is a lack of evidence to support the charges.

• Defendant argues for dismissal of counts four, five, and six, claiming insufficiency of evidence and lack of notice.

• Defendant raises concerns about due process in relation to the repeated references to his right to testify or not, and requests a mistrial.