preview

Prosecutorial Discretion Case Study

Good Essays

In the American system of law, the prosecutor is without a shadow of a doubt the most powerful actor. They are tasked with the execution of justice on our collective behalf. They possess the power to prosecute crimes, they control what evidence is shown to the grand jury, recommend prison sentences, maintain custody of evidence, can choose what is and is not evidence, they have major influence on other law enforcement actors, and have near total control of the plea bargain process. With these aforementioned powers they have the power to either serve justice or ruin lives. With the decision to charge a person with a crime they can do irreparable damage to a person’s reputation, business, livelihood, and family.
With such immense power it is …show more content…

The first step is transparency. For the average citizen and even for well-trained court watcher the actions of the prosecutor at times seem needlessly opaque; this is particularly true when it comes to prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutors upon making the decision to proceed with or to decline to proceed with charges for a criminal act should be compelled to present to the public their rational for doing so. In order to give the public a better understanding of their legal reasoning. Along with this, should come much needed reforms to the grand jury system wherein the prosecutor has to state for the record whether or they support criminal charges. Recent high profile instances, particularly, surrounding police use of force serve as a good example for the need of transparency in the process. The prosecutor should not be able to simply abdicate their duties simply to dodge a politically sensitive case by convening a grand jury. As it stands now the process leaves the public with scant clue as to what was said, the conduct of the prosecutor, or insight into their legal rational during the …show more content…

As mentioned earlier ex post facto relief and disbarment are the two major forms of accountability for prosecutors. These however are not enough as they are seemingly incapably of dealing with these bad apples when they are found. In the Center for Public Integrity study also found that of the 223 prosecutors who have been repeatedly found by the judiciary to have engaged in misconduct only two of them have been disbarred in a period of 33 years; this needs to change. There needs to be an independent review board ideally chaired by officers of the state bar, senior judges, local public advocacy groups, and state law makers to supervise activities performed by prosecutors. This board should have access to a full account of grand jury proceedings, the power to review plea agreements resulting in sentences of over five years, and trial cases for unethical behavior. Intentional Instances of misconduct should result in major consequences ranging from reassignment to disbarment. It should also punish any prosecutor found to have committed three instances of misconduct within a ten year period by removing from office. This board should also be able to suspend the absolute immunity of a prosecutor when it can be demonstratively proven that they knowingly and willingly acted outside the law or ethical

Get Access