Criminal Procedure: Adjudication Leipold Spring 2017
Background
Procedures are a series of tradeoffs btwn competing values in system
protecting individual liberty v. protecting public safety
Goals of procedure
1) protect liberty
d/n want locking ppl up to be too easy
consider how x law makes it easier/harder to chip away at one’s freedom
2) ensure more accurate decisions
3) ensure fair treatment of Δ à notice + help navigating the system
Reoccuring themes of course
limited resources
lack of $$ has a big impact on processing cases, and interpreting rules
ALWAYS argue that opp’s interpretation will lead to administration becoming overburdened
procedural errors alone are not enough to overturn a ruling
FRCP 52 – harmless error provision
errors in the proceedings that d/n affect the substantial rights of the accused are ignored
errors m/ve prejudiced Δ to overturn conviction – high bar
Steps in the process
1) a crime occurs
category 1 crimes – “index crimes”
murder, non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft
2) police investigation
area primarily regulated by courts, not C
grand jury – huge investigative tool in federal system
decides which charges are filed, and who is target of investigation
3) the arrest
different than a summons – summons used for minor offenses
4) booking
5) initial charging decision
when prosecution becomes involved – decides if keep going fwd or screen case out
6) complaint
written short statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged à FRCP 3
if charge is misdemeanor, then compl may be the final charging instrument
if charge is a felony, complaint is a temporary charging instrument
will be replaced by a formal charging doc, either:
indictment – plding approved by gj
information – not subj to gj review
both prepped by P and filed w/ ct
7) first appearance
in sts, “arraignment”
fed system, before magistrate judge
probable cause review à Gerstein hearing
judge makes sure there is enough evidence to hold Δ
appts atty if Δ indigent, bail determination set
8) preliminary hearing
makes sure there is probable cause – again, but adversarial this time
if there’s enough evidence, case is bound over to grand jury of trial ct
9) grant jury review
23 random local citizens, meet only w/ prosecutor and review evidence
is there probable cause to prosecute the accused for this crime?
yes à indict à “true bill”
same fxn as prelim hrg – usually one or other
10) filing of indictment
formal charging doc – supersedes complaint
11) arraignment – FRCP 10
Δ enters plea in open court; plea bargaining begins
12) discovery period à Rule 16
Brady doctrine – governs separate requirements re what P must disclose to Δ
to conduct a dep, need ct approval
only do this to preserve testimony for trial
think have a potential Confrontation Clause situation on yr hands
w will be unavailable – flee/death/ill, etc.
Rule 15(e)(2)
scope and manner of dep + cross must be same as allowed during trial
rule reflects underlying Confront. Cl concerns
Δ has a 5A right to be at dep, even if incarcerated – gets to face accuser
also c/n depose Δ w/o his consent
would viol. 5A right not to be a w ag yourself
Also, time to file your pretrial mtns & have pretrial hrgs – sts, hrgs on mtns, etc.
mtns practice à R 12
includes any matter that can be resolved before trial
no mtns for summary judgement in crim cases
almost all must be filed before trial or “untimely”
no uniform treatment re handling untimely claims
some courts consider waived – w/n hear
others consider forfeited – will hear on plain error review
may have to show “good cause” for late filing
ex: d/n have necess info at that time
13) trial
jury has absolute power to acquit
gov’t c/n appeal acquittal
std to convict – proof beyond a reasonable doubt for each element – P’s burden
Δ has constitutional right to challenge P’s case –
s at bail proceeding, ASK:
is Δ a flight risk?
is Δ a risk to the community?
What should Δ’s atty argue? à § 3142(g) factors judge considers:
1) Δ’s financial conditions
bail should be w/in Δ’s reach – not meant to be punitive
fewer resources, less likely Δ will be able to flee
2) seriousness of crime
more serious the crime, less likely Δ will appear = more likely receive higher bail
3) weight of evidence against Δ
if super strong, greater incentive to flee
ex: Δ has confessed, likely to be convicted
4) family & community ties
less likely to flee if has family
local family presence increases Δ’s ties w/ community
relatives abroad have opposite effect
works against Δ, has greater ability to flee and is more likely to
employment
argue job is specific to locale and not transferable à helps Δ
5) criminal record
lack of is clearly helpful
what if has a record?
record of lesser crimes – i.e. petty theft
argue Δ has a pattern of always showing up
tough arg to make, but way to use record in Δ’s favor
serious record – SOL
indicates Δ is more likely to be a danger to society on release
also less likely to show up to court
previous convictions can be factored into sentencing determination à increases likelihood of higher sentence
Δ’s attorney can always seek modification of bail if learns of above factors post-bail setting
Bail Reform Act of 1984
Rose out of fear that ppl were committing crimes while on bail
judges were setting higher bails/finding Δ to be a flight risk just to detain
Goals
