Criminal Law

Client Prevails in Important Case on Extraterritoriality of U.S. Law

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals today reversed the federal murder conviction of a Kaplan Law Firm client. The murder occurred in Mexico and the decision sets an important precedent about the applicability of U.S. law outside the United States. The case arose from the 2011 killing of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Mexico during an attempted carjacking gone wrong. Although the group that attempted the carjacking did not realize that it had targeted a vehicle operated by…

Conviction Reversed for Violation of Defendant’s Rights

The Kaplan Law Firm's Matthew B. Kaplan  has obtained the reversal of the criminal conviction of one of his clients.  In an opinion issued last week the District of Columbia Court of Appeals—the highest "state" court in the District of Columbia—agreed with Kaplan's argument that  his client had been improperly convicted in a "stipulated trial" on charges of the unlawful possession of a weapon and of ammunition. In a stipulated trial the prosecution and the defense agree on the key…

Criminal Conviction Reversed on Appeal

Today the District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued an opinion reversing the felony threats conviction of a client of Matthew B. Kaplan, The Kaplan Law Firm's Principal Attorney.  The government had argued that our client had threatened another person by asking that person, during the course of an argument, "What if I shoot you?" and "What if I shoot your car?"  The Court of Appeals—D.C.'s highest "state" appellate court—agreed with our argument that these words are not self evidently…

Successful Appeal Sets Important Precedent On Right to Impartial Juries

The Kaplan Law Firm's Matthew B. Kaplan obtained the reversal of his client's criminal conviction in a decision issued today by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals that strengthens the protections afforded by the jury system to criminal defendants.   Our criminal justice system is not always fair, especially when it comes to cases involving defendants who are poor or minorities.  Today's appellate decision holds that, at least in District of Columbia courts, citizens cannot be automatically excluded from juries…

The Kaplan Law Firm Files Confrontation Clause Appeal

The Kaplan Law Firm recently filed an appeal with the D.C. Court of Appeals seeking reversal of our client's conviction for unlawful weapons possession. The case raises an interesting issue under the Constitution's Confrontation Clause about the right of a criminal defendant to confront his (or her) accuser in court. The clause of the Constitution's Sixth Amendment that is at the heart of this appeal, and which is known as the Confrontation Clause, guarantees that, in a criminal case, the…

Can People Who Think that the Justice System Is Racially Biased Be Excluded from Juries?

Last week I argued an important case, Mason v. United States (No. 15-CF-305), before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.  I represented Mr. Mason, an African-American criminal defendant who had been convicted by a District of Columbia Superior Court jury. During jury selection the trial judge had excluded, over a defense objection, a prospective jury member who said under questioning that she thought that she could be fair and impartial in this particular case, but that, in general, she thought that…

Appeals: First Amendment, Discrimination and Criminal Cases

March is turning out to be a  busy month for appellate matters.  The Kaplan Law Firm will have oral arguments in three separate appellate cases, all of which raise important issues of law. On March 21 we have an oral argument before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond in Villa v. CavaMezze Grill, LLC, a Title VII civil rights case. In this case an employer fired an employee (my client) because she reported that another employee had told our client that she…

The Kaplan Law Firm Files Second Appeal in Important First Amendment Matter

I represent a client who was found in 2014 to have committed the crime of stalking because he truthfully told others that another person had had an affair with his wife.  Although what my client said may have embarrassed his wife’s affair partner, nothing he said could be construed as doing anything more than causing embarrassment—certainly, nothing he said constituted a threat or anything that could even be remotely interpreted as a threat.  Nevertheless, the individual named by my client…

Success in the D.C. Court of Appeals

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has issued a decision in favor of my client on a case involving important First Amendment issues. DISCLAIMER A D.C. Superior Court Judge had ruled that my client had committed the crime of stalking by posting on the internet the fact that a complaining individual had had an affair with my client’s wife.  The complainant was upset that this truthful information had hurt his representation.  The trial court ruled that my client had…

Brief in First Amendment Case Filed

I have filed an appellate brief in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on behalf of my client in what I believe is an important free speech case.  The case deals with the extent that the District’s anti-stalking law can be used to restrict speech and raises important First Amendment issues. I discussed the case in an earlier blog post. Opposing counsel’s brief is due at the end of August.  A redacted copy of the brief I filed is…