Abouts


The Serna Law Offices is well-known in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and was founded in 1981 by David Serna, a lawyer for the defense. Before establishing his law firm, Mr. Serna practiced as a violent crimes prosecutor in Albuquerque for four years. This was shortly after he earned his Juris Doctorate from the law center of Georgetown University, Washington.

Since he became an established private practitioner for defense, he has contributed significantly to the community of counsels and clients.  In 1986, after a rigorous screening process, the National Board of Trial Advocacy certified him as Diplomate and Criminal Trial Advocate, and in 1990, the New Mexico Board of Legal Specialization certified him as a Criminal Law Specialist.

His four decades of experience and knowledge have been recognized and awarded by several organizations. In 2016, he garnered the Martindale-Hubbell Client Distinction Award, a distinction given to attorneys based on different factors, such as their responsiveness, quality of service, and communication ability. In 2015, he was selected by the National Association of Distinguished Counsel as a member of the top 1% of attorneys in the United States. In 2013, he garnered the Charles Driscoll Memorial Award by the New Mexico Criminal Defense Lawyers Association.

Today, he remains an advocate of individual freedom and liberty, rights which are guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. He continues to make time for his hobbies, such as playing the guitar and bass, singing, and studying fine cigars.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Impeaching a Witness Based on Inconsistencies

One way to undermine the evidence of an opponent is to impeach his or her witnesses based on inconsistencies in his or her testimony. Lawyers are always advised to listen during the direct and cross-examination because this is the perfect time to observe the testimony and behavior of the witnesses of their opponent. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, offers helpful tips to both new and experienced lawyers. Today, he discusses prior statements of witnesses governed by the Federal Rules on Evidence 613. Discrepancies in testimonies are expected when several witnesses are testifying to the same incident. It is but natural that these individuals remember the details of the incident differently.   However, lawyers should consider only those errors and testimonial inconsistencies that are significant and deserving of the jury’s attention. Persistently bringing up minor inconsistencies will only waste the time of the court and will most likely annoy the jury. FRE 613 prov...
Read more

Cross-Examination of a Crash Reconstructionist

Crash reconstruction is a science that involves mathematics and physics to determine what happened before, during, and after a collision. Reconstruction witnesses testify about the details of a collision, such as the speed of a vehicle, the cause of a collision, and the motion of the vehicle before and after an impact. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, advises young prosecutors in preparing for the cross-examination of defense reconstruction witnesses. The prosecutor must know whether the evidence or data gathered and used by the witness supports a reliable conclusion. Here are three things to remember before conducting a cross-examination of reconstruction witnesses. 1.        Review the crash report It is important to read the crash report of the opponent’s expert crash reconstructionist. The prosecutor’s crash reconstructionist can help him understand the factors considered by the opponent’s reconstruction witness and determine the shor...
Read more

The Rules on Preliminary Hearing and Trial

Preliminary Hearings take place before a judge and only after the prosecutor has filed charges against a person. These hearings are not trials, which may be conducted before a group of individuals, called a grand jury. There are, however, procedural rules on trial that similarly apply to preliminary hearings. In this brief article, David Serna, a lawyer and educator for many years, discusses some of the rules that apply to preliminary hearings and trials. Like a trial, an ordinary witness can testify during a preliminary hearing. Generally, the testimony must be based on what they perceive and not on opinion. However, during a preliminary hearing, unlike a trial, hearsay evidence is allowed and admissible. Three things can happen after a preliminary hearing. If the charges are weak and unfounded, the judge would most likely dismiss the case outright. If there is, however, a finding of probable cause, the judge may either reduce or retain the charges made by the prosecutor...
Read more