David Serna Attorney

David Serna, an attorney-at-law, discusses various matters and issues on litigation, prosecution, and defense. Most of his readers consist of both newly-minted and experienced lawyers. Today, he discusses the importance of leaving an impact on the jury. Jurors will not remember what they do not understand. The narrative of the case and the evidence supporting such narrative must be clear to them. Ideally, the narrative must be detailed but, at the same time, concise. David Serna tells attorneys that the advantage of being concise and detailed with the facts desired to be established is that the theory of the case becomes easier for the jury to recall during the deliberations. Each piece of evidence must have a purpose. The job of the lawyer is to establish the usefulness of the evidence. For instance, there are cases where drug, blood, or field sobriety tests give weight to the theory of the case. In effect, the version of the narrative becomes more convincing to the jury. ...

Lawyers should stay ahead of their opponents and should be able to anticipate, among others, possible defenses, possible defense witnesses, the attitude of the defense counsel, and the behavior of the judge. Today, David Serna, an attorney with invaluable experience and unmatched skill, advises on what to expect during trial. 1.        Defenses of the opponent In criminal cases, there are only a few valid and legitimate defenses that may be raised by the defendant. Some of the most usual defenses are the following: -           The identity of the defendant (more commonly known as the “Some Other Dude Did It” defense or SODDI, in short) -           Innocence, such as self-defense, insanity, or necessity -           Lack of evidence -           The witness or evide...

There are many ways to convince the jury that the testimony of a witness is unreliable or that the witness himself is not credible. Before impeaching a witness, the lawyer must first be knowledgeable about the State-specific rules of evidence as these rules vary widely. Some rules that apply in one state are not applicable to another. Once familiar with the rules, the next step is to find ways to undermine the evidence of the opponent validly. Today, David Serna, attorney-at-law, shares two common grounds used in impeaching a witness. 1.        Federal Rule of Evidence 602: Lack of Personal Knowledge As a rule, anyone is competent to testify. However, a fact witness cannot testify on matters he or she has no personal knowledge of. Only opinion or expert witnesses can testify insofar as their opinions matter. A witness lacks personal knowledge when he or she was not present during the commission of the crime and has no way of knowing for sure h...

Going to trial is a whole new level of experience for freshly minted lawyers. It’s not something lawyers learn just by reading textbooks or watching films showing lawyers conducting direct and cross-examination. There is no other way to learn this but by doing—and making mistakes. If you think that you do not have the talent for litigation, you should know that some of the best trial lawyers took time to develop the skills required in litigation. In this short article, David Serna, attorney and well-known lecturer, shares the most common mistakes young lawyers make during direct examination. 1.        Relying too much on cross-examination and taking the direct examination for granted Many young lawyers depend on ways to weaken the defenses raised during the cross-examination. They forget to establish a sturdy foundation during direct examination. A story that has a strong foundation is memorable to the court. What will matter by deliberations is...