Spring 2009
Criminal Procedure: Adjudication
Dressler Book
Professor Zarling
Outline
NORMS:
Accuracy:
Correct results are the goal of the criminal justice system. There is a high standard of proof to protect the defendants from wrongful adjudication. Sometimes there is no way to know if justice is actually being served. Ex: defendant could be of bad character but maybe innocent and there are no witnesses how do you know whether to prosecute?
There are so many factors that go into accuracy including: right to counsel, impartial jury, public trials, and defendant’s right to call witnesses.
Fairness:
What constitutes fair? Equality
Limited-Government Provisions:
The bill of rights limits the ability of the government to interfere with the people (to protect us from a central government). The fifth amendment is what truly protects the citizenry.
Efficiency:
Balance between speedy trial and the rights of the party, there has been some damage to the system because the Judge wants to clear cases from his calendar so it may gloss over too many cases it may lead to conviction or release of defendants due to the need to clear the cases.
Plea Bargaining really speeds up the process, but is this justice if the defendant pleas guilty just hedge his/her chances? Without plea-bargaining the system would bog down due to the amount of time needed to try all the cases.
PRETRIAL RELEASE:
System begins at arrest and filing of the complaint. After arrest a hearing is held pertaining to bail (arraignment) [in lesser crimes there is no hearing, the police release the defendant with a set bail]. This is an issue of freedom. They set the conditions of containment.
Ways to get people out of jail:
-police let you out on bail or with a citation
-release on recognizance (signa certification to show up again)
-supervised or unsupervised release (sometimes the defendant is required to get
treatment)
-unsecured bond on failure of defendant to show; only applies if defendant fails to show
-deposit bond (10% program): defendant can get out by posting 10% of the bail amount
but gets the money back if they show up in court.
-Full bond: secured; generally you go to a bailbondsman and he will keep the 10% and he
basically guarantees that you will show
*Stack v. Boyle p.769: about excessive bail under the 8th amend. Court finds that there is no right to pre-trial release. Your right to release is conditioned upon assurance that you will not flea the jurisdiction and will show up in court for your hearings. Therefore, bail can only be so high as to provide adequate assurance that the defendant will show for trial. If a bail amount which is greater than is usually fixed for a crime is applied evidence should be produced to support that unusually high bail.
The federal reform act of 1984 (note 8 p.773) provides that a judicial officer may not impose a financial condition that results in the pretrial detention of that person. This is to force the judge to use the preventative detention provisions of the statute.
There is racism in the system, because the whites make bail far more often and those that make bail are less often convicted because if in jail at time of trial it seems as tho you are already guilty.
*United States v. Salerno p.774: (no constitutional right to bail, you can be detained and it is not considered excessive. However, there are factors for determining whether bail can be denied: nature and seriousness of the charges, substantiality of the Government’s evidence, the arestee’s background anf characteristics, and the nature and seriousness of the danger posed by the suspect’s release. Furthermore, the government’s regulatory interest I community safety can, in appropriate circumstances outweigh an individual’s liberty interest. Court holds that preventative detention of the bail reform act is regulatory and not punitive (detention cannot be forever due to the speedy trial statute which requires a trial within 180 days of indictment] Therefore if the goal is to protect community then preventative detention is fine however it should not be used to ensure that defendant shows at trial.
States are not subject to the bail reform act, in their case they are more likely to detain in capital cases because the defendant’s aer more likely to flee
Judges might set bail high to prevent perp from running around outside where they might flee or be a danger to society. This is often the case with drug dealers, because they see bail as part of the cost of doing business.
Trentonian Factor: Appellate Judges do not reverse high bail because they don’t want to be put in the Newspaper and have the perp injure someone else, or be seen as soft to the public in big cases.
*Rothgery v. Gillespie p.10 of the supplement: public defender does not have to be supplied at the bail hearing. [can be a problem because the defendant can hurt his case if he speaks at the hearing.]
Bail Reform Act of 1982 §3142(c)(2) p. 50 of supplement: “the jud
ystem. The dissent however is concerned with fairness and felt that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the discovery.
* Blackledge v. Perry p.808: prosecutor brought charges for a harsher penalty after the defendant appealed his conviction. The Supreme Court held that the Prosecutor had a right to bring charges for an increased punishment but not in order to punish defendants for appealing their convictions nor could the prosecutor bring greater charges in order to discourage appeals.
Preliminary hearings are basically a chance for the defendant to look at the prosecutor’s charging documents. They are also to screen cases.
JUDICIAL SCREENING:
*Coleman v. Alabama p.812: counsel not provided for defendant at the preliminary hearing. Defendant claims that this was unconstitutional. Court says there has to be an analysis of whether there was a chance for substantial prejudice and whether presence of counsel would avoid that prejudice. Court held that counsel would have affected the trial so counsel is necessary for preliminary hearings.
Courts expect greater probable cause where no warrant was issued for the arrest.
In NJ the prosecutor must have notice of a preliminary hearing, which is ordered by a Judge. Therefore, prosecutor would try to avoid this by indicting the defendant, which would make the hearing moot.
If the case sucks the prosecutor may want to let the case get to the preliminary hearing that way the Judge will dismiss it and take it off the prosecutor’s hands without having to take blame for it.
The state prosecutor can screen cases in 3 ways:
like the case and go for an indictment
dismiss the case if it sucks; or
downgrade the crime and send it to municipal court
In mercer county 45% of crimes are dismissed or downgraded and 55% go to gran jury with 15% if those dismissed by the grand jury.
GRAND JURY SCREENING:
If the prosecutor does a good enough job indoctrinating the grand jury they should get whatever they want.
