Renewed War on Drugs, harsher charging policies, stepped-up criminalization of immigrants — in the current climate, joining the NACDL is more important than ever. Members of NACDL help to support the only national organization working at all levels of government to ensure that the voice of the defense bar is heard.
Take a stand for a fair, rational, and humane criminal legal system
Contact members of congress, sign petitions, and more
Help us continue our fight by donating to NFCJ
Help shape the future of the association
Join the dedicated and passionate team at NACDL
Increase brand exposure while building trust and credibility
NACDL is committed to enhancing the capacity of the criminal defense bar to safeguard fundamental constitutional rights.
NACDL harnesses the unique perspectives of NACDL members to advocate for policy and practice improvements in the criminal legal system.
NACDL envisions a society where all individuals receive fair, rational, and humane treatment within the criminal legal system.
NACDL’s mission is to serve as a leader, alongside diverse coalitions, in identifying and reforming flaws and inequities in the criminal legal system, and redressing systemic racism, and ensuring that its members and others in the criminal defense bar are fully equipped to serve all accused persons at the highest level.
Showing 1 - 15 of 169 results
NACDL comments on proposed revisions to Rules 3A:11 and 3A:12 proposed by the Virginia State Bar’s Criminal Discovery Reform Task Force.
Joint letter from NACDL and VACDL to the Supreme Court of Virginia regarding the Court's decision to delay the effective date of the new criminal discovery rules until July 1, 2020.
NACDL comments to the Virginia Supreme Court on proposed revisions to Virginia's discovery rules: Proposed Revisions to Rules 3A:11 and 3A:12 Received from the Virginia State Bar Criminal Discovery Reform Task Force.
Discovery rules that leave defendants in the dark about the evidence against them undermine fairness and due process and increase the risk of wrongful convictions. Criminal discovery can be divided into two categories: (1) disclosure of so-called “exculpatory evidence” that is constitutionally required under the Supreme Court’s 1963 Brady opinion and (2) disclosure that is required by statute or court rule. There is great variation among jurisdictions regarding the amount of discovery required by statute/rule and even the Brady decision.
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s letter to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding federal disclosure obligations and suggesting an amendment to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Comments to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules regarding proposed amendments to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Comments with the New York Council of Defense Lawyers to Judge Donald W. Molloy, chair of the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, regarding proposed amendments to Rule 16.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Committee on Practice & Procedure regarding proposed rule changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules Governing 2255 Proceedings.
Letter to the Advisory Committee on Local Rules chairman regarding proposed changes to criminal disclosure rules in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Letter to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on Rules of Practice & Procedure regarding proposed rule changes to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
NACDL comments on S.B. No. 653, an act concerning open-file disclosure in criminal cases.
Although the prosecution often uses social media evidence to show “intent” for all manner of human conduct, the legal challenges to social media evidence are growing in strength.
Rule 5(f)(1) requires judges to inform prosecutors of their obligation to produce exculpatory information and provides that courts may hold prosecutors accountable if they do not comply with a Brady order. Rule 5(f)(2) requires that each circuit council promulgate a Model Order that a district court “may use as it determines is appropriate.”
The amended Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5 requires that in all criminal proceedings, at the first scheduled court date at which both the prosecutor and defense counsel are present, the judge must issue an order confirming the prosecutor’s disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland. Defense lawyers should consider NACDL’s Model Standing Order on the Prosecution’s Brady Obligations.
