charged with a class A misdemeanor harassment for FB under fake account?

   

Harrassment

charged with a class A misdemeanor harassment for FB under fake account?
I am In Missouri. It’s almost 10 months old. I did get Discovery and only partial screenshots and statement was all had. Would that be all evidence using, or is there a real chance they would try to warrant fb for info on the deleted account? Being as it’s only a misdemeanor

Justin Hunt’s Answer
We cannot walk you through your case in these messages. You need to speak with a criminal defense attorney in your area.

Alibi Defense in Missouri

   

Alibi Defense

An alibi is a defense in criminal cases whereby a defendant demonstrates that he or she was somewhere else other than the scene of the crime at the time the alleged crime took place. In an alibi, a defendant is simply arguing that it is impossible for him or her to have committed the crime because they were at a different place at the time the crime was supposedly committed. A successful alibi rules out the defendant as the perpetrator of the offense

… Continue reading

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY

   

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY, Stolen goods

Missouri statutes states that it’s an offense to hinder another person’s legal ownership of his own goods in the event that one receives the goods that he or she knows has been stolen or even thinks that the property has been stolen

… Continue reading

DEMONSTRATING PROBABLE CAUSE

   

Constitution and Gavel and probable cause

Probable cause refers to a legal standard used in the United States by the police to get a warrant for a search or arrest of a suspect. Grand juries use this for their indictments. It is the procedure used in prosecuting and arresting criminals and also to make searches which relate with their properties or personal issues.

… Continue reading

The Exclusionary Rule

   

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Procedure

The aim of the Exclusionary rule is to protect the rights of American citizens, protect them from arbitrary intrusion and dissuade law officials from abusing constitutional rights. The rule prevents the use of direct evidence gathered in violation of the Constitution inadmissible in court. Evidence such as one gained from unreasonable search and seizure or other unconstitutional manner may be suppressed by the court. This means that the court will mostly not admit such evidence in the event of the criminal’s trial. The rule is also employed when a violation indirectly results in incriminating evidence.

… Continue reading