The judge could ask Martin if he can afford a lawyer. If he can’t get a lawyer the judge can appoint a lawyer for him. The judge will uphold sixth amendment. The case law will be Gideon v. Wainwright, it is important to have the right to the counsel because some lawers don’t know and with a counsel who knows the law and can help you. Since juror #9 doesn’t trust police office to will good for Mr. Acquit’s.
The victim will have to go through the court process, which in many ways can cause the person to be victimized again. When a plea bargain is done just so it can get off the “docks” it can but a negative perception from the community of the justice system. Plea bargaining is a win/win situation neither of the counsel’s lose. The judge’s caseload is lessened because there is no need for a trial. With the defendant they get a shot at leniency from the judge.
A plea bargain can help a prosecutor by it saves the court valuable time for high-priority cases. Also it can help a prosecutor because then don’t have go through a trial if they have a lot of other cases. A plea bargain can also help a prosecutor because if the defendant takes the deal it shows that they are taking responsibility for the crime. When it comes to the defendant a plea bargain can help by the defendant could get a lesser sentence if they plead guilty to the crime the committed. Also it can help the defendant by not making them sit though a trial.
The court held that in the instant case the court had either found that these conditions were met or they were undisputed. Therefore, the communication was privileged and protected from disclosure. I believe the criteria set forth in RFF Family Partnership, LP v. Burns & Levinson is a very practical and rational one. It allows the lawyer to protect and serve his fiduciary duty to his client, and at the same time if a conflict should come up, it allows the lawyer to seek advice of a lawyer without the fear intimidation by way of disclosure. Such privileged communications lead to resolutions in resolving existing conflicts, and avoiding potential conflicts.
Prosecutors can sometimes get away with misconduct as it is extremely difficult to prove that misconduct had actually taken place. Often times the prosecutor is viewed as being on the side of justice and as a result it is difficult for the defendant (who is accused of a crime) to turn the tide against the prosecution. Although during the trial both the defense as well as the judge may report a prosecutor for misconduct, this rarely happens as these reports are often dismissed. This is because as long as the prosecutions misconduct does not affect the outcome of the case, then it is tolerated, meaning that a prosecutor can harass a witness or the defendant so long as the harassment did not have anything to do with the outcome of the trial. The fact that the prosecutor works in the interests of the state can be seen as the underlying factor here.
The Sixth amendment protects the accused upon the case against him. The Right to Counsel is given to everyone and this constitutional mandate adheres to the constitution. An accused may choose his own if his means permit him to do so. If not, however, and it is upon the court to appoint who shall represent him, the accused has no say of who will be appointed for him since what is contemplated by law is the essence of a competent lawyer’s presence. The right of self-representation may, of course, be opted upon refusal to receive the services of the one appointed by the court, but it shall still be in conformity with the set guidelines for the same right (Tomkovicz,
It is not considered jury tampering because the prosecution and defense attorneys have the right to know the credibility of the person that would be deciding the fate of the defendant. Why or why not? The only way that I would see it being jury tampering is if after the jurors are chosen, someone starts threatening or trying to coerce the witness to not testify at the trial. Lawyers can also exercise a challenge for cause claiming the juror could not be
Within the due process one may not be treated cruel, unfair or be given unreasonable treatment. Every accused person is entitled to fair procedures, and the due process applies to the criminal justice system as the trials, parole hearings, and administrative hearings. Due process main goal is to protect the innocent from being wrongfully convicted but may be looked upon as focusing on the rights of the accused and ignoring the rights of the victims. Crime control model is taken back a little and is the complete opposite of Due Process Model, which the crime control model focuses on the initial arrest, prosecution, and the conviction of a criminal. Due process priorities stand with protecting an
Cover Letter 1) The purpose of this essay is to shed light on the difficulties of prosecuting DUI’s. Justice is not being served, instead defense lawyers are looking for loopholes to get their clients charges dropped or reduced. 2) I learned their needs to be changes in the legal system. If someone is found not guilty of a crime, it needs to be because they did not do it, not because of a technicality. 3) I found a lot of good information on this topic.
First you have the Prosecution. The responsibility of the prosecution is to prove that without a shadow of a doubt that the defendant committed the crime. Im sure there are times that the prosecution does not think the defendant is not guilty but it is there moral right to keep the trial going and prove their case. It has got to be difficult for the prosecution to know that because of the case they have built against a person could decide the rest of their life. Lets get to the Defense.