Two defendants rewired ATMs to dispense $20 bills for each one dollar they were supposed to dispense. According to the facts, requesting $40 at an altered ATM would produce 40 $20 bills instead of two. The scheme defrauded the ATMs' owners of more than $600,000.
Prior to the defendants being convicted at trial, the ATMs' owners replaced almost all of the machines because they did not meet federal regulations requiring that they be accessible to individuals with sight impairments. The defendants argued that they would have examined the machines if they had not been destroyed by the company.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that because the owner of the machines, not the government, made the decision to replace the machines, the defendants had no standing to complain. The defendants argued that if their experts had been able to evaluate the machines they would have discovered potentially exculpatory evidence.
Trial courts are sensitive to arguments that the government has failed to disclose exculpatory information. In one Kentucky case, charges were dismissed against a defendant because the government had deported witnesses prior to trial who might have offered exculpatory information at trial for the defendant.
Experienced Kentucky criminal defense attorneys aggressively seek all evidence from the government that could potentially exonerate their criminal clients.
