Home Criminal Law 5 Common Strategies of a Criminal Defense Lawyer

5 Common Strategies of a Criminal Defense Lawyer

Mounting a defense for most crimes is often arduous, typically requiring significant financial investment, multiple witnesses’ involvement, and ample evidence collection. This complexity limits a criminal defense attorney’s ability to deploy every conceivable tactic and strategy.

These attorneys must recognize that not all tricks and strategies will successfully overcome the prosecution’s case. Elite defense attorneys know that achieving such outcomes often involves either collaborating with the government or employing specific strategies to lessen the sentence’s impact or outright dismissing the charges. Here are five common strategies criminal defense lawyers use to defend their clients.

Argument for Self-Defense

Every state recognizes certain permitted actions within the context of self-defense or crime prevention. The legal framework upholds an individual’s essential right to self-protection in situations of immediate risk. Should a person respond to a verifiable threat of significant physical harm or a comparable danger, such an action may not be considered criminal.

However, illustrating these distinctions is intricate as it demands that the courts be persuaded of the direct threat encountered by the defendant. The defense must also demonstrate that the intensity of force applied was proportional to the threat faced. To be effective in court, the defense is tasked with proving to the jury that the defendant’s reactions were consistent with those of any reasonable individual in similar situations.

There are occasions where one might need to delegate someone else the power to make crucial decisions on their behalf, including those concerning legal matters. In these situations, employing a Power of Attorney is advisable.

Police Misconduct

It’s not unheard of for some members of the police force to stretch the truth or engage in improper behavior during their investigations. Such unethical actions by law enforcement can involve:

  • Issuing untrue statements within testimonies and reports
  • Incorrect management of evidence
  • Forcing a blameless person into acknowledging a crime they didn’t commit

If someone is adversely impacted by such actions , it would be wise to contact Purser Law best Edmonton criminal lawyer. They might be able to help pursue a defense strategy. Depending on the case, an attorney may even go after damages for any unwarranted hardship endured by their client.


Entrapment pertains to instances where a person is led or motivated by a police officer to perpetrate a crime, primarily to secure evidence for that individual’s legal prosecution. In defense against claims of entrapment, the accused should substantiate their lack of inherent tendency towards criminal behavior. 

Even when evidence of coercion or influence is present, the foundational aspect of an entrapment defense hinges on proving an absence of preconceived intent to commit the crime. Legal principles disallow convictions based on entrapment if evidence demonstrates that the accused had no original plan or desire to engage in unlawful activity and that such activity was conducted exclusively under duress or manipulation by law enforcement entities.

While it is within the purview of law enforcement to devise scenarios that might tempt an individual towards committing a crime, it is beyond their jurisdiction to actively engineer the commission of a crime.

Evidence Acquired Unlawfully

If your legal matter encompasses an incident of search and seizure, the potential exists that the search executed might have bypassed legal protocols. Under the U.S. Constitution protections are in place to shield individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures, compelling law enforcement officials to secure a judicially authorized warrant predicated on substantial evidence, or probable cause, before a search.

While the rigidity of this warrant necessity has experienced some loosening through judicial rulings across the years, mechanisms are still intact to offer defense against searches and seizures that breach legal boundaries.

If suspicions arise regarding the legality of the conducted search within your case, your attorney specializing in drug-related defenses is positioned to contest the validity of the search operation. Upon a court’s acknowledgement of the search being executed outside the confines of the law, any evidence procured during such an unauthorized search stands to be excluded from presentation during the trial.

Unreliable Witness

Questioning the dependability of a witness or an informant often emerges as a strong defensive measure in particular cases. The authority  to deem the credibility of a witness lies with the judge or jury. If a defense lawyer can unveil contradictions in a witness’s statements or prove falsehood, the credibility of that witness’s testimony  is significantly weakened in the eyes of the law.

In cases involving informants, your legal counsel has the prerogative to challenge the veracity of the information procured from them. Though police departments are permitted to engage informants, they must initially ascertain the informant’s reliability and enforce strict supervision during their collaboration with law enforcement. 

Unfortunately, the rigorous application of these standards is frequently overlooked. Should this lack of due diligence have affected your case, there exists a basis for your attorney to dispute the informant’s involvement.


People accused of crimes are entitled to have a lawyer who is deeply familiar with the nuances of defending against criminal charges. Such a lawyer will thoroughly analyze the case, incorporating any elements that might mitigate the situation in favor of their client. It’s vital for anyone facing criminal accusations to engage a legal advisor with considerable experience to secure the most advantageous resolution.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here