Criminal Procedure 2050

chap13.pptx

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Criminal Procedure 2050

Criminal Procedure

10th Edition

Joel Samaha

© 2018 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website for classroom use.

‹#›

Court Proceedings II: Trial and Conviction

Chapter 13

‹#›

After the Decision to Charge

After the decision to charge, court proceedings divide into two forms:

Adversarial proceedings, taking place inside the courtroom.

Informal negotiations, taking place outside the courtroom.

‹#›

Applicable Constitutional Amendments

ARTICLE III, § 2 The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the Crimes shall have been committed.

THE FIFTH AMENDMENT No person shall be . . . compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. . . .

THE SIXTH AMENDMENT In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and District wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . To be confronted with the witnesses against him, . . . and to have the assistance of Counsel for his defense.

‹#›

Setting High Demands

Constitutional commands set high demands because criminal convictions can result in great deprivations, including loss of:

Liberty

Property

Privacy

Life (sometimes)

‹#›

Trials vs. Pleas

Only about 5 percent of convictions arise from a trial.

The other 95 percent come from guilty pleas.

Pleas may be straight guilty pleas or pleas resulting from negotiation.

Trials and guilty pleas promote different interests:

Trials promote fact-finding by the adversarial process.

Guilty pleas promote efficiency.

‹#›

Trial by Jury

The Constitution creates a right to a trial by jury for all crimes, except for “petty offenses.”

The Court has used six months’ imprisonment as the dividing line between petty and other offenses.

Some traditionally petty offenses violate the “moral seriousness standard” and allow for jury trials.

‹#›

12-Member Jury Requirement

There is NO constitutional right to a 12-member jury. The constitutional test consists of two elements:

Are there enough jurors to find the truth?

Are there enough to allow community participation in decision making?

Ballew v. Georgia (1972): A five-member jury is not good enough.

‹#›

Jury Selection

The Sixth Amendment guarantees you the right to an “impartial jury” that represents a “fair cross section” of the community.

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the systematic exclusion of members of defendants’ racial, gender, ethnic, or religious group.

‹#›

The Federal Jury Selection Act

Most states follow the Federal Jury Selection Act:

It requires a random selection from a “fair cross section of the community.”

No exclusions can be based on “race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or economic status.”

‹#›

Compiling the Juror List

In most states, jurors are selected randomly from the following sources:

Telephone book

Local census reports

Tax rolls

City directories

Driver’s licenses list

‹#›

Exemption from Jury Service

Most prospective jurors ask to be excused from service. Some groups are ordinarily exempt from jury service:

Persons below voting age

Convicted felons

Persons who can’t write or read English

Certain working professionals (doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, judges…)

‹#›

Common Excuses for Exemption

Common excuses for exemption from jury service include:

Economic hardship

Advanced age

Illness

Need to care for small children

Distance between home and courthouse

‹#›

Voir Dire

Prosecutors and defense counsel use voir dire (“to speak the truth”) to select jurors from the jury panel.

Peremptory challenges (striking without having to give a reason) are limited by statute.

Prosecutors and defense counsel have an unlimited number of challenges for cause (striking biased jurors).

Prospective jurors in death penalty cases can be struck for cause if they’re opposed to the death penalty (this ensures a death-qualified jury).

‹#›

The Right to a Public Trial

At all stages of a trial, defendants have the right to a public trial. Public trials protect two distinct rights:

Public access—The right of the public to attend the proceedings.

Defendant’s rights—The right of defendants to attend their own trials.

‹#›

Guaranteeing the Right to a Public Trial

Three constitutional amendments guarantee defendants the right to a public trial:

The Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses

The Fifth Amendment due process right

The Fourteenth Amendment due process right

‹#›

Public trials protect two distinct rights

Public access. The right of the public to attend the proceedings

Defendants’ rights. The right of defendants to attend their own trials

‹#›

New slide

Limitations on the Public Trial

The right to a public trial is not absolute. Judges can limit access in certain cases, such as:

Courtroom is too small

Undercover agents need protection

Certain witnesses need protection

Child witness in a sexual abuse case

Defendants’ rights are not absolute, either. They cannot be disruptive.

‹#›

The Stages of the Trial

Trials progress orderly:

Opening statements

Presentation of evidence

Closing arguments

Instructions to the jury

Jury deliberations

Verdict

‹#›

Opening Statements

Opening statements let the prosecutor and defense counsel outline their cases to the jury.

‹#›

Presenting Evidence

The state presents first, then the defendant.

The state presents admissible evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The defendant raises reasonable doubt of guilt.

Rules of evidence restrict what may be presented.

The Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause includes the right to cross-examine the prosecution’s witnesses and restricts the prosecution’s use of hearsay testimony.

‹#›

Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay isn’t banned absolutely. It cannot be offered, though to prove the truth of statements. The prosecution can introduce hearsay if they can:

Demonstrate the witness’s unavailability and, hence, the necessity to use out-of-court statements.

Show that the state obtained the evidence under circumstances that clearly establish its reliability.

‹#›

Compulsory Process

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the defendant’s right “to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in [his or her]…favor.”

Defendants can compel witnesses to come to court to testify for them.

‹#›

The Burden of Proof

The prosecution carries the whole burden to prove defendants guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In doing so, they cannot call defendants to take the stand.

The Fifth Amendment provides that “no person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…”

‹#›

Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Here are some trial court definitions of proof beyond a reasonable doubt:

A doubt that would cause prudent people to hesitate before acting in a matter of importance to themselves

A doubt based on reason and common sense

Substantial doubt

Persuasion to a reasonable or moral certainty

‹#›

Closing Arguments

Closing arguments let the prosecution and defense counsel highlight the salient points of their cases.

Prosecution presents first, then the defense, and finally the prosecution rebuts.

‹#›

Jury Instructions

Jury instructions usually inform the jury about the following subjects:

The respective roles of the judge to decide the law and the jury to decide the facts

The principle that defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty

The principle that the state bears the burden of proof

The definition of all the elements of crime with which the defendant is charged

Jury room procedures

‹#›

Jury Deliberations and Verdicts

Jurors deliberate to reach a verdict. Unless it’s a hung jury (unable to reach a verdict), juries return one of three verdicts:

Guilty

Not guilty

Special, mainly related to insanity or capital punishment.

If the jury convicts, the case constitutes to judgment—the court’s final decision on the legal outcome of the case.

‹#›

The “Unanimous Verdict” Requirement

There is no constitutional requirement for a unanimous verdict.

Verdicts of 11-1 and 10-2 are okay

Verdicts in six member juries have to be unanimous.

‹#›

Arguments for Unanimous Verdicts

Unanimous verdicts:

Instill confidence in the criminal justice process

Guarantee that the jury carefully reviews the evidence

Ensure the hearing and consideration of minority viewpoints

Prevent government oppression

Support the principle that convicting innocent defendants is worse than freeing guilty ones

Fulfill the proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt requirement

‹#›

Jury Nullification

Juries nullify the law when they acquit defendants even though they believe they’re guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jury nullification reflects a community role as the safety valve to relax the law’s rigidity and provide justice in individual cases.

‹#›

Conviction by Guilty Plea

There are two types of guilty pleas:

Straight guilty pleas—Defendants plead guilty without concession.

Negotiated guilty pleas—Defendants plead guilty after getting concessions through negotiation.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided guilty pleas and plea bargaining are constitutional.

‹#›

Historical Developments That Contribute to Guilty Pleas

Increasing complexity of the trial process

Expansion of the criminal law

Increasing crime rates

Larger case loads

Political corruption in urban courts

Increase in the number of criminal justice professionals

Increasing statutory powers of prosecutors

‹#›

The Constitution and Guilty Pleas

When defendants plead guilty they waive three rights:

The Fifth Amendment right to remain silent

The Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury

The Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against them

SCOTUS has rule that to give up these constitutional rights defendants

Pleas must be voluntary and knowing.

Judges must determine there’s a factual basis for the plea.

If judges fail to ask defendants questions regarding their plea in open court it is a reversible error.

‹#›

The Plea-Bargaining Debate (Slide 1 of 2)

Some say negotiation better serves the search for truth; others argue that the adversarial process is better.

Some maintain guilty pleas save time; others contend plea negotiations more than make up for the time it takes to go to trial.

Some insist the criminal justice system would collapse under its own weight if only a few of the now vast majority of defendants who plead guilty asserted their right trial; others contend plea bargaining would make little difference in how many defendants plead guilty.

Some maintain the guilty plea intimidates the innocent and emboldens the guilty; other say outcomes between jury trials and guilty pleas don’t differ much at all.

‹#›

The Plea-Bargaining Debate (Slide 2 of 2)

The public and police usually oppose plea bargaining.

Plea bargaining in the “shadow of trial” model:

Prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys act rationally.

Split the cost.

Plea bargaining outside the “shadow of trial” model:

Legally irrelevant factors sometimes skew the fair allocation of punishment.

Bounded rationality refers to the strongly documented finding that people don’t “attempt to ruthlessly maximize utility.”

Information deficits: Defendants may not know what evidence the prosecution has or how it will affect jurors.

‹#›