On Tuesday, a new lawyer for O.J. Simpson filed an attempt to acquire his release from Nevada state prison. The lawyer claims that the former NFL star was represented so badly by his old lawyers in his trial and appeals that he should be given a new trial. The motion was filed in Clark County District Court in Las Vegas and is 94 pages long. The documents detail the faults of the trial strategy and the performance of Simpson’s former lawyers Yale Galanter and Gabriel Grasso. Galanter is from Miami and Grasso is from Las Vegas. The documents also discuss how Simpson wanted to recover family photos and personal items from sports memorabilia dealers that were stolen from Simpson in 1995 after he was acquitted in the murders of his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.
In 2008, Simpson was convicted in Las Vegas for kidnapping and armed robbery in a theft at a casino hotel room stuffed with two memorabilia dealers and a middle man. Simpson was sentenced in 2008 to nine to 33 years in prison for the robbery. He is the only person from the case still in prison.
The new lawyer is Patricia Palm. She cited 22 grounds in the motion fault Galanter and Grasso. The case is going to be argued by Palm on July 3 in Clark County District Court in Las Vegas. The first claim in the motion is that Galanter had a conflict of interest in the case and should have removed himself. Grasso said that he did not read the document but that “I’m behind O.J. and I hope this petition helps him get out of prison.”
Prior to the incident in Las Vegas, Galanter was the lawyer for Simpson and the document filed in court claims that Galanter knew about the plan and even helped Simpson’s efforts towards retrieving his items from the sports memorabilia sellers. The court documents state that Galanter and Simpson dined together at a restaurant at a Las Vegas casino the night prior to the robbery. Galanter has told a judge that he was not there and that he had absolutely nothing to do with the incident. Galanter told Simpson that the plan was “legally permissible so long as there would be no trespass and no physical force used,” according to the court documents.
“To this day, Simpson does not know whether there were actually guns pulled or displayed in the room,” the document said. “Even after Simpson was arrested, Galanter repeatedly advised Simpson that the state could not prove its case, given the evidence that he intended to reclaim his own property.”