Preview

Courtroom Participants' Professional Standards

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1215 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Courtroom Participants' Professional Standards
Courtroom Participants' professional Standards
Willie L Jones
CJA/224
01-07-2013
University of Phoenix

Abstract
Prosecutorial misconduct is defined as the use of deceptive, illegal or reprehensible methods used by a prosecutor, to attempt to persuade either the court or the jury. Wrongful convictions in this country are nothing new to the criminal justice system. They are as old as the system itself, and they will continue to exist as long as the fallibility of human judgment continues.

Courtroom Participants ‘Professional Standards *

In Virginia State, Jay Lentz was convicted by a jury in July 2003 for the kidnapping and murder of his wife. The jury recommended that Mr. Lentz spend life in prison; however, the United States District Judge Gerald Lee dismissed the kidnapping charge due to lack of evidence. Two weeks after the judge convicted Mr. Lentz of murder, he found evidence of prosecutorial misconduct therefore the judge ordered a new trial for the alleged murder charge.

There was a calendar that was attained by officers on the deceased possession. This evidence was ruled inadmissible by the court, and yet it was still in the jury room for their viewing. The jurors had told the judge, that this calendar was very influential in deciding a guilty verdict. Judge Gerald Lee held a hearing and found the chief prosecutor Steven Mellin of the case has put the calendar in the evidence box that goes to the jury room for them to view. The judge also made clear that his belief was the prosecutor Mellin’s misconduct had been reckless, on purpose and not just a harmless mistake.

The prosecutor’s seemed to think they were above the law, however, Judge Gerald Lee knew otherwise. The prosecutor’s offered no apologies and swore there wasn’t any prosecutorial misconduct and that the judge had no right to investigate them to begin with. It is assumed the reasoning for prosecutor Mellin’s misconduct is because his personal involvement with the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The court case was about The Ransom Of Red Chief. The teams defended the witnesses such as Red Chief, Sam, Bill. The prosecuting team believed that Bill didn’t get kidnapped by those two kidnappers. The defense team believed that Bill was mentally challenged and Red Chief did harm his kids and abuse the cat. The prosecuting team said that Red Chief was hounded down by those two kidnappers and lured in by some candy that they had hidden. They conjointly believed that they put her in a bag and yielded her into a little shed. The prosecuting team won the case by way of evidence. I believe that the defense team should have won by way of evidence from the trial.…

    • 121 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    While he puzzled over what the prosecutor might have meant, he thought back to an argument he’d had with Davis’s boss, Williamson County district attorney Ken Anderson, who had led the prosecution’s effort. During two pretrial hearings, the lawyers had clashed over what evidence the state should, or should not, have to turn over. As Allison remembered it, state district judge William Lott had ordered Anderson to provide him with all of Wood’s reports and notes before the trial so he could determine whether they contained any “Brady material.” (The term refers to the landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland, which holds that prosecutors are required to turn over any evidence that is favorable to the accused. Failure to do so is considered to be a “Brady violation,” or a breach of a defendant’s constitutional right to due process.)…

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Decision: In 1980, Williams, seeking a writ of habeas corpus in United States District court was denied but eventually reversed by The Court of Appeals, in that the state failed to prove that the detectives acted in good faith. The United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded the decision, expressing that the condition of the body and the location will be admitted as preponderance of evidence under the exclusionary…

    • 756 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    HISTORY: At bench trial the District Court ruled for defendant, finding as a matter of law that…

    • 332 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Unit 6 Peggy

    • 422 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The roles of the Prosecutor were not easy in this case. The prosecutor was given old evidence that really had no concrete. The police had only a knife collection, drawings, and a date of Masters Mother’s death to build a case on.…

    • 422 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Minnoesota V. Ronald Riff

    • 1596 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In this case, the prosecuting attorney are to communications orally and also in writing. The prosecutor main goal is to prove to both the judge and jury that the defendant is in guilty. The prosecutor opening the statement of Riff did knowingly commit the crime of breaking, and burglary on September 30, 2011 between 12:10am and 12:20 am orally to the judge and jury. The incident located at the Marquette’s Market on 1234 Main St. Midtown, Minnesota 44333, which the owner of the market is known as Speedy Marquette. It the prosecutor choice to share his/her witnesses including all evidence with the defense attorney before trail begins and to present evidence against the defendant to both jury and the judge. “All witnesses in this case include: Otis Ripple, Soapy Water, Marty Martini, C. Sharp, Betty Bitty, Rusty Fender, Guido Concertino, and the arresting officer are orally examined by the prosecution, and then the defense.” (Curran, P. & Strauch, G.). When prosecutor finish presented their parts, then it’s a choice for the defense to present their part of evidence. The prosecutor has choices of whether to examine all the defense witnesses to set straight all their statements, and to make sure that the defense is being guilty. The defendant witnesses include: Red Chips, Ace Harte, Jacques, Orbedder, Vibes Blare, Sally Slick, Matilda Slick and Gigi Gig have all been questioned by their defense attorney. Now that the defense has finish point out their statement and all of the witness are being examined and crossed, and all evidence has been presented both orally and in…

    • 1596 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Tim Masters Case

    • 440 Words
    • 2 Pages

    As the prosecuting attorney, or the district attorney I am responsible for representing the states case against Tim Masters. It is my job to work with the investigating detectives and the police department to build a sold case against Tim Masters. The burden of proof rest souls on my shoulders, I must prove without a reasonable doubt that Tim Masters killed Peggy Hettrick. My job is the hardest job of all the court actors. I have several rules of conduct I must follow to ensure that my case in lawful and does not violate any person rights. In the case of Tim Masters, I used evidence found in his home to win the case against him. As the prosecuting attorney, I first had to look at the evidence presented by me from the police department and determine if this was enough…

    • 440 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Mapp V. Ohio Case Study

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Mrs. Mapp was found guilty and sentenced to prison 1-7 years. Mrs. Mapp and her attorney took the case to the Supreme Court in Ohio.…

    • 1111 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Weeks Vs United States

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The officers had growing evidence which suggested Weeks’ illegal activity. Evidence against Weeks proved his guilt and he should be punished. Decision  The Court‘s unanimous decision was to overturn Weeks's conviction. The Court declared the evidence illegally gained and ordered the evidence be excluded in the future from any federal court …

    • 302 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Steve Arey and Terry Jordan were young, inexperienced lawyers who should have never even been considered for a capital case. Judge Persin, the presiding Judge in the case, however, decided on these two gentlemen because other more experienced lawyers refused to take the case because of the huge financial sacrifice it would require. Albeit public speculation that Judge Persin's previous profession as a prosecutor had led him to heavily favor the prosecution, his decision stood. The two prosecutors who Arey and Jordan would be opposed by were Mickey McGlothlin and Tom Scott. Both prosecutors had far more experience than the defense lawyers, but that didn't stop Judge Persin from appointing Arey and Jordan to the case. It was an obvious mismatch, intentional or not, and was just the beginning of many problems that would arise for the defendant's case.…

    • 1746 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Mr. Welch Case

    • 1303 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The killing was unlawful with the reason to be that it was not an act of self-defense or defense of any other individuals. Finally, at the time of the killing, the accused proved that he had…

    • 1303 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Sacco And Venzetti Essay

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages

    was found guilty of this crime and it was detrimental to the murder case. Not only was…

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    At issue in Holmes, is whether the South Carolina rulings, prohibiting evidence of third-party guilt, violated the defendant’s…

    • 1331 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    When it comes to terms of conducting investigations, law enforcement officers were permitted to manipulate and use unjustified tactics to question the suspects. These measures have a strong tendency to eventually forced defendants into admitting a crime, whether the defendant is guilty or not. Moreover, in some scenarios, the prosecutors would even went as far as convicting defendants based on flimsy evidence and purposely overlook the solid proofs that can demonstrate defendants’ innocence. These dishonest prosecutors abandoned their responsibilities to obtain justice and to serve as the lawful agent for the people; instead, they deliberately violate the moral principles of their duties and the rights of the defendants to secure convictions. The usual forms of prosecutorial misconduct include but not restricted to: “coercing false confessions”, “lying or intentionally misleading jurors about their observations”, “failing to turn over exculpatory evidence to prosecutors”, “pressuring defense witnesses not to testify” and etc.…

    • 385 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Courtroom Observsation

    • 1477 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Xander Barden and Katelyn Lippa are the defendant’s (O’Malley’s Tavern and Patrick Gibbs) representatives they are recommending the Court present an outline verdict to the bartender, John Daniels and O’Malley’s Tavern. There is definite understanding and helpful information defined in the Indiana Dream Shop Act which contains useful knowledge. Mr. Edward Hard did not participate or take on any behavior or actions that provided proof of intoxication. Debora White, the Plaintiff is in search of compensation from the defendants, O’Malley’s Tavern and Patrick Gibbs with the theory that Mr. Patrick Gibbs had concrete awareness of Mr. Edward Hard’s consumption of alcohol. (I.C. 7.1-5-10-15.5, 1996) cites that Mr. Gibbs the defendant have actual knowledge of the person being intoxicated before damages are allowed to be awarded. Practical awareness does not persuade the hindrance nor does individual awareness. Indirect evidence doesn’t support practical awareness only actual knowledge. Individual awareness can sustain the intrusion whereas actual knowledge has to carry through and support the intrusion. Observable dealings with the recognizable events of intoxication are prejudiced according to the 7th Indiana State Circuit Court. In the Supreme Court statue stated prior to the year 1988 common law tolerated practical awareness for intrusions and caused a change in the law for this not to be supported.…

    • 1477 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays