Q. “Is it true that my lawyer should have asked for an ‘in limine’ ruling by the judge?” A. “This is what ‘in limine’ means, and why it is good,” explains Ft. Lauderdale criminal defense lawyer John M. Castellano

Posted by:

“Not too many people ask this question, precisely because most folks have never even heard of ‘in limine’ motions. Many people don’t know that the best lawyers can narrow the playing field a whole lot ell in advance of atrial, limiting the kind of evidence and type of testimony that the jury is ever allowed to hear. — Florida criminal attorney John Castellano

“Yes, it’s always and STILL the very best practice to ‘think around the corner’ as Solomon wisely said 3000 years ago in the Book of Proverbs (“The wisdom of the prudent is to think around the corner.”) and to seek advance rulings (limiting the evidence that can come in against you!) by filing and arguing preemptive legal motions in court.” — Ft. Lauderdale federal criminal attorney John Castellano

“The term ‘in Limine’ must be Latin, I’m almost certain, but it basically means “in advance,” e.g. when one of the parties to the litigation is seeking an advance ruling from the judge as to the admissibility of particular piece of evidence, document, weapon, photo, witness statement or any type of ‘evidence’ or testimony. It only makes sense that you want the judge to make an “in limine” ruling on the admissibility of a confession or admission, for example, BEFORE you let the prosecution tell the jury about it. — Florida federal criminal lawyer John Castellano

“Imagine, assume for a moment that the criminal defense lawyer is successful at the end of the trial — after the witness (often a detective) takes the stand and tries to tell the jury that the defendant confessed or admitted to something, but in this scenario, assume that the defense lawyer had filed an ‘in limine’ motion to keep the old ‘confession’ or ‘admission’ out of evidence, inasmuch as the police may have committed an illegality, causing the ‘confession’ to have been improperly obtained, as an example. In that case, the defense lawyer would have successfully kept out of evidence — and therefore away from the jury’s hearing, any reference to a former ‘admission’ or ‘confession.’ Had the “in limine” ruling NOT been secured in advance, the prosecution would have elicited the testimony and presented the damning evidence to the jury, i.e, testimony ALL about these otherwise inadmissible confessions or admissions, and a “mistrial” would have been declared.” — Broward County criminal defense lawyer John Castellano

“Why would a mistrial have been declared at that point? The ‘well’ would have been poisoned too much, and the defendant would no longer receive a fair trial, as the jury would have heard damning testimony that they never should have — it’s a lot like chess, trying to preemptively preclude the opponent from making future moves which if allowed, could very well defeat you.” — Ft. Lauderdale criminal defense lawyer John Castellano

Please feel free to call me anytime at the office @ 954 766 8810, and know that I would be privileged to help you. I am,

Always there for you and your family,

John Castellano



About the Author:

John M. Castellano is a Fort Lauderdale criminal defense attorney who has helped thousands of clients throughout Florida. While building a reputation as a premiere Fort Lauderdale DUI attorney, Mr. Castellano has worked tirelessly to develop strategies to best protect the rights of those arrested for DUI in Broward, Dade and West Palm. However, Mr. Castellano is not just a drunk driving lawyer. He has been a successful domestic violence attorney, drug trafficking attorney, as well as all other Felony and Misdemeanor cases.

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.