The Candid Review: A Blog About Appeals

As an Illinois appeals attorney can explain, a U.S. Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s opinion that would have allowed a terrorism suspect access to evidence gathered against him. The case illustrates an ongoing controversy between lawyers for suspected terrorists and the Justice Department.

The Case Against the Suspect

A 20-year-old man by the name of Adel Daoud has been accused of attempting to blow up two South Loop bars. Daoud is from Hillsdale, Illinois. Prosecutors say they caught Daoud pressing a button that he believed would blow up the bars. The government compiled a variety of evidence against the suspect. The defendant was denied access to much of that evidence on grounds that it could compromise national security. As a Michigan federal appeals lawyer discusses, a lower court sided with Daoud and would have allowed his lawyers access to the classified material.

The Rationale for the Latest Ruling

As an Illinois appeals lawyer explains, criminal suspects, in general, have a right to review the evidence compiled against them. However, this is not an absolute right. Rather, if disclosure of the evidence could compromise national security or another compelling state interest, it is within the judge’s discretion to deny access. U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman sided with the terror suspect and would have allowed disclosure of the secret government files. The case was appealed to the intermediate federal appeals court. The U.S. Circuit Court found that Judge Coleman erred and once again sealed the files from Daoud. It will be up to Daoud’s lawyers and Daoud himself to decide whether to appeal the case further, perhaps even to the U.S. Supreme Court.

For qualified legal assistance, contact an Illinois federal appeals attorney at the offices of Brownstone Law. To set up an initial consultation to discuss your case, call 855.776.2773.