Re: How Could You Determine if
Nobody here can give you that education in a forum post. What you are asking for is a law degree and that has to be acquired through an accredited educational program. I hear Harvard is good. You will need to maser high school English first, however.
Seriously, though, this person has been convicted in court (presumably while represented by competent council) and was denied an appeal (again, presumably presented by competent council). So, now you are coming to a public forum of predominantly non-attorney posters for information upon which to base a second appeal request??? Lots of luck to ya!
The victim’s inability to positively identify his assailant was obviously already brought up in the initial trial. The jury found the defendant guilty anyway. No grounds for appeal there.
Any confession, whether there is a question of impairment due to alcohol and/or drugs or not, requires evidence to back it up. The trial defense attorney would have been seriously incompetent if he/she had overlooked a lack of corroborating evidence…for instance, corroborating evidence like the defendant found hiding in the immediate area, near the gun used in the assault, near clothing worn by the shooter, and two accomplices giving corroborating statements. No grounds for appeal there.
The K9 continued on the track after the defendant was apprehended because there were 2 other people involved and the K9 was doing what he/she is trained to do. You cannot say that the K9 “never identified” the defendant just because he/she didn’t run up and bite him. The defendant gave himself up so the K9 handler instructed the K9 to continue the track. That simple. No grounds for appeal there.
Behind the badge is a person. Behind the person is an ego. This is as it should be, person at the center and ego to the back.