Comm. v. A.H.
This case involved several charges relating to the illegal possession of a firearm. Client was one of several people that police observed during an undercover surveillance. During the surveillance, police alleged that they observed client place an item in the rear compartment of a sport-utility vehicle. Upon further investigation, police reported observing a handgun in plain view inside of the rear compartment of the vehicle.
Mr. Kadish elicited testimony from the police during cross-examination that showed the vehicle did not belong to client. Any movements made by client in the rear compartment of the vehicle would have been incredibly difficult for police to observe. Further, there was a lack of scientific evidence, such as fingerprints or DNA, linking client to the handgun. Finally, there were several people in the area of the rear compartment of the vehicle that police failed to detail in their reports.
At the conclusion of trial, client was acquitted of all charges.