Is it true that for a preliminary hearing before a trial, that it would not be in the interest of the defendant for his/her attorney to bring in witnesses and/or other defense moves, because it would show his hand before the trial?
I guess the prelim is when the DA brings in all their witnesses and evidence against the defendant. Why shouldn’t a criminal defense lawyer do the same at that time. I would think it would serve to encourage the DA to offer a plea bargain if there was sufficient evidence that the prosecution might not win a jury trial.
The DA will not "bring in all his witnesses and evidence". He will present only "just enough" evidence to convince the judge that there is a valid case to be tried.
There is no point the defense producing rebuttal evidence, because at prelim the question is "If ALL the States evidence is true, is it enough to convict him?" Saying "but it’s not true" is therefore irrelevant.
After the prelim comes preparation for trial, which includes the discovery process, during which both sides have to share their evidence. That is when the dickering over a plea bargain begins.
Richard
It is up to the prosecutor to provide enough evidence to move forward to trial, and then the evidentiary hearing is to introduce what each side wants to be used in the trial. It is usually not the case that the defense needs to present that much, but there are differences in jurisdictions.