Under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute and unreviewable power to choose whether or not to bring criminal charges and what charges to bring.
The charging attorney gets to consider factors like: the strength of the evidence supporting a more serious charge and; what the fairer charge would be, considering the facts of the case and the circumstances of the defendant. For example, a prosecutor who thinks a jury could convict a defendant of grand theft might choose to charge only joyriding. On the flip side, it's not …
Apr 15, 2018 · There are four major reasons why a prosecuting attorneys may choose to exercise their prosecutorial discretion: (1) There is not enough evidence, or the evidence is not strong enough to justify a prosecution; (2) The interest of society will be better served by exercising mercy than a criminal punishment; (3) The prosecuting attorney’s responsibility to control …
Jan 01, 2003 · The answer is simple: "prosecutorial discretion." Under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute and unreviewable power to choose whether or not to bring criminal charges and what charges to bring.
With no record of prosecutorial practices, the public has no way of judging how she would exercise her power and discretion as a U.S. Attorney. Even if the nominee had prior experience as a prosecutor, the public would have no knowledge of the policies and practices that inform her most important decisions – charging and plea-bargaining – because these policies and …
The answer is simple: "prosecutorial discretion." Under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute and unreviewable power to choose whether or not to bring criminal charges and what charges to bring.
Why Good Prosecutors Use Their Discretion A sensible prosecutor will use discretion because: The prosecution has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If there's not enough evidence, the case may be withdrawn, or other charges could be brought. It can make the judicial system more efficient.May 13, 2021
Charging. Prosecutors are the gatekeepers of the criminal legal system. They decide whether to prosecute and what to charge. Their harsh and discriminatory practices have fueled a vast expansion of incarceration as the answer to societal ills over the last several decades.
ProsecutorsAs an elected or appointed official, the prosecutor is the most powerful official in the criminal justice system. Prosecutors exercise unfettered discretion, deciding who to charge with a crime, what charges to file, when to drop the charges, whether or not to plea bargain, and how to allocate prosecutorial resources.
Prosecutorial discretion also allows prosecutors to secure the cooperation of witness defendants by allowing them to offer reduced sentences or charges in exchange for testimony against another defendant.Nov 12, 2019
The term "prosecutorial discretion" refers to the fact that under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute and unreviewable power to choose whether or not to bring criminal charges, and what charges to bring, in cases where the evidence would justify charges.
For example, in criminal law, police officers often decline to arrest people for minor offenses (like jaywalking and even minor drug possession). Alternatively, if a defendant is arrested and charged, prosecutors will often bring lesser charges in order to strike up a plea deal to eliminate the need for a trial.Dec 20, 2017
Prosecutors are the most powerful officials in the American criminal justice system. The decisions they make, particularly the charging and plea-bargaining decisions, control the operation of the system and often predetermine the outcome of criminal cases.
Prosecutors may decline to press charges because they think it unlikely that a conviction will result. No matter what the prosecutor's personal feelings about the case, the prosecutor needs legally admissible evidence sufficient to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Discretion is the power of officials to act according to the dictates of their own judgment and conscience. Discretion is abused when the judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable. If the plaintiff or the defendant thinks that the trial court judge has abused the discretion, the party can appeal the case.
In a law enforcement context, discretion only concerns decisions that are made in a legal setting. When decisions that are made by officers do not yield the desired positive results, but are made in good faith, these decisions still fall under the umbrella of discretion.
Prosecutors benefit from plea bargains because the deals allow them to improve their conviction rates. Some prosecutors also use plea bargains as a way to encourage defendants to testify against codefendants or other accused criminals.
What Is Prosecutorial Discretion. In our system of jurisprudence, there are always at least two parties who are adverse to each other. In criminal law, the adverse parties are generally the State and the defendant . Prosecuting attorneys are attorneys who represent the State (some scholars argue that prosecutors represent the victim) ...
Prosecuting attorneys are attorneys who represent the State (some scholars argue that prosecutors represent the victim) in a criminal case. But to what extent is this power granted, and under what authority? In our system of jurisprudence, prosecuting attorneys have, what attorneys refer to as, prosecutorial discretion.
There is no doubt that prosecutorial discretion is a necessary and important part of our system of justice — it allocates sparse prosecutorial resources, provides the basis for plea-bargaining and allows for leniency and mercy in a criminal justice system that is frequently harsh and impersonal.
Under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute and unreviewable power to choose whether or not to bring criminal charges and what charges to bring.
Either the prosecutor is ethical and follows the law without regard to the political consequences, or public sentiment changes, as it did in the Deep South in recent decades, making it politically palatable to pursue the cases. Rhonda Brownstein is the director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Legal Department.
And in Maricopa County, Patrick Haab, a veteran with mental problems, was charged with aggravated assault by sheriff's deputies who found him at an Arizona rest stop holding seven undocumented immigrants at gunpoint. The prosecutor later dropped all the charges.
Attorneys are the chief prosecutors for each federal district. The Attorney General oversees each U.S. Attorney and the United States Department of Justice. 27 More than 95 percent of county and municipal chief prosecutors are elected.
1 There is widespread agreement among criminal law scholars that grand juries generally follow the (...) 3 Of the many duties and responsibilities of the prosecutor, the charging power is the most important and is the essence of her control over the entire system.
Angela J. Davis is a Professor of Law at the American University Washington College of Law where she teaches Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, and Criminal Defense: Theory and Practice. She has been a Visiting Professor at George Washington University Law School and has served on the adjunct faculty at George Washington, Georgetown, and Harvard Law Schools. Professor Davis’ publications include articles on racism in the criminal justice system and prosecutorial discretion in the Michigan, Fordham, and Iowa Law Reviews. She has also published numerous book chapters on various criminal justice issues and is a co-author of the 4th edition of Basic Criminal Procedure (with Professors Stephen Saltzburg and Daniel Capra). She was a 2004 Soros Senior Justice Fellow and is currently writing a book on prosecutorial discretion and power. She was a reporter for the American Bar Association Justice Kennedy Commission in 2004. From 1991 – 1994, she was the Director of the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia (PDS). She also served as the Deputy Director from 1988 – 1991 and as a staff attorney at PDS from 1982 – 1988, representing indigent juveniles and adults. Professor Davis is a former law clerk of the Honorable Theodore R. Newman of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Thus, there is no system of checks and balances to assure that these important decisions are made judiciously and without race or class bias. Because charging and plea-bargaining decisions are made in the privacy of prosecutors’ offices, it is difficult to discover arbitrary or racially biased decisions.
A plea bargain is an agreement in which a prosecutor permits a defendant to plead guilty in exchange for a concession, such as reducing the charges or recommending a lenient sentence. There are advantages of plea bargaining to both the accused and ...
Dropping charges. After a prosecutor files a charge, the prosecutor can reduce the charge in exchange for a guilty plea or enter a nolle prosequi (nol. pros.). A nolle prosequi is a formal statement by a prosecutor declaring that a case is discontinued.
In jurisdictions where the death penalty is in force, the prosecutor literally decides who should live and who should die by virtue of the charging decision. Criminal justice professors Joseph Senna and Larry Siegel propose the true measure of a prosecutor.
In any criminal investigation, a prosecutor chooses which charge or charges to file or seek from a grand jury. A prosecutor also has the discretion to refrain from filing any charges at all. A prosecutor may choose not to pursue a criminal case for several reasons. Political pressure.
Prosecutors must carry out their duties to the public they represent , but like most public agencies and private businesses, resources are finite. A prosecutor may decide to make prosecution of certain offenses a priority, while offenses that are deemed lower priority might not be as vigorously pursued.
Because prosecutorial discretion is a legitimate component of the prosecutor's powers, a private person usually has very few options to force the prosecutor to act. Courts will not intervene to force the prosecutor's hand. Most of the time, if the case is sensational, public pressure is the best means of persuasion.
This approach involves using a legal tool called a "writ of mandamus.". Usable when a public official fails to take official action, a private person may seek this writ, which asks for a court order directing an official to perform a duty that the official is under a legal obligation to perform. A writ of mandamus, however, is not available in most ...
Most of the time, prosecutors have the final say when it comes to filing charges or asking a grand jury for an indictment. Political or public pressure sometimes changes their minds.
Generally speaking, a victim cannot press charges nor force an unwilling prosecutor to file charges or seek an indictment from a grand jury. The prosecutor, exercising "prosecutorial discretion," has the final say.
(a) After charges are filed if not before, the prosecutor should diligently seek to identify all information in the possession of the prosecution or its agents that tends to negate the guilt of the accused, mitigate the offense charged, impeach the government’s witnesses or evidence, or reduce the likely punishment of the accused if convicted.
When criminal charges are dismissed on the prosecution’s motion, including by plea of nolle prosequi or its equivalent, the prosecutor should make and retain an appropriate record of the reasons for the dismissal, and indicate on the record whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The prosecutor serves the public interest and should act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety both by pursuing appropriate criminal charges of appropriate severity, and by exercising discretion to not pursue criminal charges in appropriate circumstances.
(a) A prosecutor should seek or file criminal charges only if the prosecutor reasonably believes that the charges are supported by probable cause, that admissible evidence will be sufficient to support conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the decision to charge is in the interests of justice.
(a) While the decision to arrest is often the responsibility of law enforcement personnel, the decision to institute formal criminal proceedings is the responsibility of the prosecutor. Where the law permits a law enforcement officer or other person to initiate proceedings by complaining directly to a judicial officer or the grand jury, the complainant should be required to present the complaint for prior review by the prosecutor, and the prosecutor ’s recommendation regarding the complaint should be communicated to the judicial officer or grand jury.
Such steps may include: filing motions including motions for reconsideration, and exhibits; making objections and placing explanations on the record; requesting evidentiary hearings; requesting or objecting to jury instructions; and making offers of proof and proffers of excluded evidence.
Final control over the scheduling of court appearances, hearings and trials in criminal matters should rest with the court rather than the parties. When the prosecutor is aware of facts that would affect scheduling, the prosecutor should advise the court and, if the facts are case-specific, defense counsel.
The fact that a particular case did not get filed quickly does not mean that someone will not be charged with a crime, though this is possible. It is also equally possible that the prosecuting attorney did not see your case as a priority and is getting to it.
Almost every kind of criminal charge in Washington has a limited time in which charges can be filed. This concept is called the Statute of Limitations and there are only 6 serious crimes that do not have such a time limit (murder being one of them which is why you hear of charges being filed 30 years later). The statute of limitations varies from 1 year for misdemeanors, 2 years for gross misdemeanors or longer depending on the type of felony alleged. If you know the particular crime you may be charged with, you can look this up in this statute. So, technically, prosecutors have until the end of this time period to file; however, there are motions that can be filed to dismiss charges if the delay was unfair and prejudicial to the defendant. Also read the statute carefully, this period of time does “not run during any time when the person charged is not usually and publicly resident within this state”.
There are things you can do in the investigation stage of a case to help, but a charging decision is based on (1) the facts the prosecutor has (2) is there any immediate need to file and (3) the statute of limitations of the crime.
The statute of limitations varies from 1 year for misdemeanors, 2 years for gross misdemeanors or longer depending on the type of felony alleged. If you know the particular crime you may be charged with, you can look this up in this statute.
Technically, yes, this is the answer most criminal defense lawyers | attorneys will give you; however, in practice, we see lower level crimes being filed within 2-6 weeks with a few going at as far as 3 months and even out to 12 months plus, in a couple of unique circumstances (sometimes prosecuting attorney offices hold off on filing charges on a large number of cases because they are waiting on the outcome of a pending appeal). With serious felonies, it really depends on the facts and a consultation is necessary. We have seen charges happen within a month, or we have seen charging decisions linger as long as 1-2 years depending on the evidence and scope of the investigation. As part of our representation and investigation of cases, we touch base with the investigating detective to get an idea of how long they expect to take to finish their reports and/or process the evidence. This often gives us an idea of when the file will make it to a senior prosecuting attorney’s desk for a charging decision. Officers take vacations, sick leave happens; but, based on experience, we get a a rough idea of what is going on.
With a successful background in law, courtrooms, wrestling, rugby and jujitsu, Robert Rhodes’s nature is well-suited for argument and litigation. Mr. Rhodes knows how to talk clearly and directly to his clients, adversaries and to the Court. His common sense, straight talk and experience put his clients immediately at ease. Mr. Rhodes does not do anything half way and you will sense this when you meet him. Read more >>