2019-2020 SMU Dedman School of Law Criminal Clinic Update

September 25, 2019
3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Kristin Meeks, under the supervision of Adjunct Clinical Professor or Law Mike McCollum, argued a motion to suppress in Dallas County Criminal Court. Meeks, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated argued that while the client consented to a blood draw, that consent did not extend to the subsequent forensic analysis of the blood and that either specific consent or a warrant was required. The Court disagreed and denied the motion.

September 23, 2019
3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Paxton Moore, under the supervision of adjunct clinical professor of law Mike McCollum, argued a motion to suppress in Dallas County Criminal Court. Moore, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated, argued that 1) because the warrant only authorized seizure of the client’s blood the subsequent analysis constituted an additional and unconstitutional search and 2) the State exceeded the scope of the search warrant when it retested the blood more than two years later. The Court disagreed and denied the motion. 

September 20, 2019
3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Paxton Moore, under the supervision of adjunct clinical professor of law Brook Busbee, argued a motion to dismiss in the Dallas County Criminal Court of Appeals. Moore, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated, argued that because more than four years had passed since the offense and more than two years have passed since arrest—the State had violated the client’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. The Court disagreed and denied the motion. 

September 20, 2019
3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Jarad Lott, under the supervision of adjunct clinical professor of law Brook Busbee, successfully argued a motion to suppress in Dallas County Criminal Court. Lott, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated, argued that the warrant only authorized seizure of the client’s blood and that under Texas v. Martinez, a 2019 Texas Court of Criminal Appeals decision, the subsequent analysis of the blood constituted an additional and unconstitutional search. The judge agreed and granted the motion to suppress the blood analysis. 

September 17- 18, 2019

3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Jarad Lott, under the supervision of adjunct clinical professor of law Brook Busbee, represented a client charged with Assault with Family Violence in a trial by jury in Dallas County Criminal Court. Lott conducted voir dire, delivered the opening statement and conducted both direct and cross examinations. In his closing argument Lott contended that his client did not make any contact with the complainant and thus could not have committed an assault. The jury agreed and returned a not guilty verdict.

August 19, 2019
3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Paxton Moore, under the supervision of adjunct clinical professor of law Brook Busbee, argued a motion to suppress in the Dallas County Criminal Court of Appeals. Moore, on behalf of a client charged with assault, argued that the recordings of 911 calls were inadmissible testimonial hearsay and should be suppressed in order to protect the client's Sixth Amendment confrontation right. The Court agreed in part, suppressing portions of the recordings. On September 26, 2019 the case was dismissed. 

August 19–21, 2019

3L Criminal Clinic Chief Litigation Counsel Jordan Burger, under the supervision of Adjunct Clinical Professor of Law Mike McCollum, represented a client charged with misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated (0.142 breath test) at a trial by jury in Dallas Criminal Court. Burger conducted voir dire, the opening statement, cross & direct examination, and final argument. While the six member jury all agreed that the State failed to prove the accused did not have the normal use of his mental or physical faculties by reason of introduction of alcohol, two jurors believed the State had proved the accused's alcohol concentration was at or above 0.08 while driving, resulting in a hung jury and mistrial.

 

July 25, 2019

3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Jordan Burger, under the supervision of Mike McCollum, Adjunct Clinical Professor of Law, successfully argued a motion to dismiss in Dallas County Criminal Court. Burger, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated, argued that the client’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was violated by a nearly three year delay from the client’s arrest to the date of the hearing on the motion. The Court granted the motion and dismissed the case with prejudice. 

July 19, 2019

3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney Jordan Burger, under the supervision of Brook Busbee, Adjunct Clinical Professor of Law, successfully argued a motion to dismiss in Dallas County Criminal Court. Burger, on behalf of a client charged with Driving While Intoxicated (Second), argued that the client’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was violated by a delay of two years and eighteen days from the client’s arrest to the date of the hearing on the motion. The Court agreed, granted the motion and dismissed the case with prejudice. 

June 4, 2019

3L Criminal Clinic Student Attorney, Pearl Choi, under the supervision of Adjunct Clinical Professor of Law Mike McCollum, represented a client charged with Driving while Intoxicated based on a purported blood alcohol content of 0.116 in a trial by jury in Dallas County Criminal Court. During the trial, the State offered the lesser charge of deferred obstruction of a roadway, which the client accepted.