When pursuing charges against someone for alleged crimes, prosecutors often engage in behavior that goes beyond acceptable boundaries. This is commonly referred to as prosecutorial misconduct. Prosecutors are expected to adhere to two sets of guidelines regarding their conduct. The first set includes laws that govern the impartiality of the proceedings they oversee, which are often considered violations of due process. The second set pertains to unethical acts that go against the standards of ethics that all attorneys and prosecutors are held to. In this article, we will delve into the topic of prosecutorial misconduct in greater detail.

Understanding Prosecutorial Misconduct

Prosecutors are expected to uphold the highest moral standards. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case. When prosecutors engage in dishonest acts or attempt to influence the jury or court's decision through deceitful or repugnant means, it is generally referred to as prosecutorial misconduct. Although it can occur at any stage of the criminal court system in California, it typically happens during sentencing hearings, jury trials, and pretrial procedures.

Types of Misconduct by Prosecutors

There are various instances of improper conduct by prosecutors. The following are some examples:

Eliciting Illegal Evidence

A common example of incorrect witness examination is when evidence that is not admissible is obtained. Prosecutors should refrain from questioning witnesses about such evidence, especially when it goes against a court order. Judges routinely make rulings on the admission of evidence, either before or during a trial.

To ensure the protection of defendants' rights and to guarantee that convictions are based solely on reliable and relevant evidence, it is crucial to enforce these orders. Attorneys should provide clear instructions to their witnesses, prohibiting them from testifying about evidence that has been excluded by a court order. Additionally, prosecutors are strictly prohibited from asking any questions during cross-examination that may potentially elicit forbidden information.

While this is not always the case, questioning can unintentionally lead to the admission of inadmissible evidence, which can cause irreversible harm. You should note that once evidence is presented to the jury, they cannot hear it again. Therefore, such behavior should be avoided to prevent any potential harm.

Moreover, prosecutors may unlawfully elicit evidence that is typically inadmissible in trials, meaning evidence that is not expressly prohibited by a court order. One common example is attempting to prove a defendant's guilt by referencing their prior criminal history, even if it is unrelated to the offense they are currently on trial for.

Endorsing the Credibility of a Witness

The opinion of the prosecutor holds significant influence as it represents the State and can potentially sway the jury to align with the Government's evaluation of the evidence, rather than forming their judgment. However, it is considered unlawful for prosecutors to vouch for a witness's truthfulness, as doing so may unfairly impact the jury's perception of the witness's credibility.

Bearing Witness for a Missing Witness

Prosecutors are not allowed to insinuate that they have additional evidence of guilt that they cannot present to the jury or explain. Instead, they should confine their arguments to logical conclusions based solely on the facts presented during the trial.

When a prosecutor misrepresents what an informant or witness would have said to the jury, it deprives the defendant of the crucial opportunity to question and cross-examine the witness. As a result, the jury is left with no choice but to accept the prosecutor's interpretation of the testimony.

Inaccurately Citing the Law

It is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct for a lawyer to intentionally mislead the jury by fabricating legal facts. Prosecutors who misuse their authority to manipulate the law not only run the risk of confusing juries but also potentially causing a miscarriage of justice.

Disputing Unsupported Information

In a criminal case, a jury is strictly prohibited from making a decision based on anything other than the evidence presented during the trial. It is not permissible for them to seek information from the public. Prosecutors engage in misconduct when they present facts that are not supported by evidence.

Misrepresenting Evidence

In closing arguments, the prosecutor's description of the proof and its alleged implications can be highly persuasive in influencing the jury. However, prosecutors can commit wrongdoing, unfairly prejudice the defendant, and mislead the jury when they misrepresent the facts.

Discrediting the Defense

It is improper for a prosecutor to claim that the defense is false or to make absurd, derogatory remarks about the accused person or their attorney. These types of arguments have the potential to unfairly influence the jury against the defendant, for reasons unrelated to the quality of the evidence proving guilt. By insinuating that prosecutors know the accused's guilt, such attacks undermine both the prosecution's burden of proof and the presumption of innocence.

Defending Inconsistent Prosecution Theories

Arguing contradictory theories to obtain guilty verdicts against multiple defendants is a case of malpractice on the part of the prosecution. For instance, it is not permissible for a prosecutor to assert that each of the two accused individuals was the sole attacker in two separate trials concerning a crime where they believe there was only one attacker.

Countering contradictory theories compromises the validity of convictions and the integrity of the criminal justice system, while also increasing the risk of convicting innocent individuals. It is important to remember that a prosecutor's role is not solely focused on securing convictions, but rather on seeking the truth.

In addition to the due process clause's protection of fundamental fairness and dependability, the deliberate manipulation of contradictory evidence by a prosecutor raises serious ethical concerns.

Providing Personal Views

Prosecutors hold a higher level of authority compared to other attorneys or witnesses, as they represent the people of the state of California. Due to this inherent authority, prosecutors are prohibited from expressing their personal opinions or convictions regarding a defendant's guilt, especially when there is a risk that the jury may perceive it as coming from sources other than the evidence presented during the trial.

Making a Religious Authority Appeal

The prosecutor's use of religious authority is inappropriate. This issue often arises when discussing punishment in the penalty phase of a capital prosecution. Some prosecutors have argued that the death penalty is required by the Bible or that it aligns with God's intention.

Such arguments enable a prosecutor to replace personal religious beliefs, which goes against the constitutional separation of religion and state. This interference can impede a jury's capacity to apply state and federal law effectively.

Shifting the Proof's Burden

Another significant violation occurs when prosecutors mishandle the burden of proof required for a conviction. The presumption of innocence serves as a crucial defense against the state's immense power, resources, and authority, which are represented by the prosecutor's office. It safeguards an individual's liberty.

This is because it is difficult to believe in the accused's innocence when faced with a conventional courtroom on the first day of a jury trial. It is challenging to overcome the fact that both the police and the prosecutor, who are considered official state agents, believe in his guilt. This is precisely why he has been put on trial.

The principle of presumption of innocence is a crucial legal concept that places the burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the state. This principle serves as a counterbalance to the persuasive forces that are at play in a court of law. The presumption of innocence is a requirement for and a safeguard of the rule of law, and it is based on the fundamental belief that it is better to acquit someone guilty than to wrongfully convict someone innocent.

Therefore, your strongest defense against wrongful convictions is undermined when a prosecutor informs the court that the burden of proof lies with the accused, that guilt is presumed or implies in any manner that the accused should present evidence to challenge the prosecution's case.

Common Causes of Prosecutorial Misconduct

Wrongfully convicted individuals often suffer long-lasting harm due to prosecutorial misconduct in court. Unfortunately, even when the detrimental effects of such wrongdoing are apparent, the prosecutor often manages to evade accountability. The following three reasons are the most typical for prosecutorial misconduct:

The Pressure for Conviction

When the public perceives prosecutors as not being "soft on crime," it often works to their advantage. Being seen as lenient towards "lawbreakers" almost always leads to negative outcomes in future elections. As a result, there is a higher risk of prosecutorial misconduct in high-profile cases that receive media attention.

Due to the scrutiny of both the general public and the government, a prosecutor may feel pressured to take "any necessary steps" to secure a conviction in a case. The need to maintain a reputation as a "tough on crime" office is one of the main factors contributing to prosecutorial misconduct.

Some prosecutors may resort to fabricating evidence or suppressing exonerating evidence in their pursuit of reelection. A study conducted in 2013 revealed that prosecutors, especially those seeking reelection, often opt for taking more cases to trial rather than accepting fewer plea deals.

Career Suicide for Individuals Who Report Misconduct

Professionals in the legal system often find value in cultivating cordial relationships with their peers. It is common practice for lawyers to leverage a friendly rapport with the prosecution to negotiate favorable plea deals. However, reporting any misconduct by prosecutors can have serious consequences and may even jeopardize one's career. While companionship helps foster and maintain positive professional relationships, it can also create a barrier for attorneys to come forward and expose wrongdoing without fearing potential backlash.

Lawyers are obligated by the American Bar Association's Professional Conduct Rule 8. 3(a) to report any misconduct by their colleagues if they have doubts about their reliability, integrity, or suitability. However, despite the clarity of this rule, attorneys often express concerns about potential reprisals from within the legal fraternity.

To defy convention and prioritize justice above camaraderie, it is crucial to have a criminal defense lawyer who is committed to maintaining the highest moral standards. A trustworthy attorney will file court motions to ensure that decisions are not based on unlawful, immoral, or incorrect actions by the prosecution. If a motion is successful, there is a greater chance that the court will reduce the defendant's sentence, drop the charges, or overturn the conviction, ultimately protecting the innocent from wrongful imprisonment.

Lack of Consequences

It is common for prosecutors accused of unethical behavior to go unpunished. The only recourse available to a prosecutor found guilty of misconduct is for the court to dismiss the case or order a new trial. Disbarment, even in the most egregious circumstances, is unlikely to be imposed on a prosecutor. This raises concerns about the legal system's ability to effectively investigate and apply disciplinary actions.

Prosecutors generally do not worry about facing punishment, which can discourage them from upholding moral behavior, especially in cases where the benefits of securing a conviction outweigh the potential penalties.

Defendants in criminal proceedings often face the unfortunate reality of having their right to a fair trial compromised due to prosecutorial misconduct. This emphasizes the importance of ensuring that you have a capable defense team by your side if you are ever charged with a crime. An accomplished lawyer will tirelessly fight for your rights and actively work to prevent any unethical actions by the prosecution that could potentially lead to an unjust conviction.

Remedies for California Prosecutorial Misconduct

While proving that a prosecutor broke ethical rules can be challenging, it is not an impossible task. With the help of a trustworthy attorney, you can gather crucial evidence that demonstrates misconduct such as falsified testimony, negligence towards other potential suspects, or reliance on a witness known for providing false testimonies. In the event of a successful appeal in the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or any higher appeals court, a judge may be compelled to dismiss the case or grant a retrial.

It is crucial to understand that unless your defense lawyer submits a motion before the sentencing hearing, the judge cannot order a retrial. To accomplish this, your lawyer needs to demonstrate two essential components:

Prejudice

Your lawyer should demonstrate that the defendant was unfairly targeted due to prosecution wrongdoing. Essentially, the actions of a biased prosecutor can impact the verdict in a case. A prosecutor may exhibit bias due to:

  • Making claims based on information rather than proof.
  • Making provocative remarks in an attempt to influence the jury's verdict.
  • Voicing personal thoughts.

The court only finds in favor of the accused when there is doubt cast on their guilt, specifically excluding prosecutorial misconduct. If the conclusion of the case would have been different without the unethical actions of the prosecutor, an attorney often can reverse a guilty conviction. Therefore, if there is a preponderance of evidence linking the defendant to guilt, it can be anticipated that the court will uphold the guilty finding.

Disapproval of Misconduct

If your lawyer raises concerns about unethical actions by a prosecutor, it is often easier to establish prosecutorial misconduct and secure a new trial. When misconduct occurs, the judge may instruct the jury to disregard the prosecutor's words or actions by objecting.

Additionally, you have the right to request a new trial if your legal team's assistance was ineffective. Proving the ineffectiveness of your legal counsel and their failure to protest against wrongdoing can be challenging. Therefore, it is crucial to carefully choose the best legal representation from the outset to avoid such issues.

Misconduct by the prosecution can have a serious impact on your chances of being acquitted. Prosecutors, given their positions, can unlawfully undermine the rights of defendants by withholding crucial evidence, fabricating evidence, or making inappropriate arguments to increase the likelihood of a conviction. A reliable criminal defense lawyer can strive to prevent prosecutors from engaging in unethical behavior, thus reducing the risk of an incorrect conviction or unjust societal stigma.

Infringing the Accused's Right to Silence under the Fifth Amendment

It is an individual's absolute right to exercise their right to remain silent when being arrested by the police and not provide any self-incriminating evidence. The right to remain silent about one's actions is one of the most crucial constitutional protections. The Supreme Court has long recognized that the prohibition against coerced testimony is a fundamental right. This principle of justice is deeply ingrained in popular culture and morality and is considered one of the essential pillars of a free democracy.

Among other benefits, it shields individuals from severe, coercive police questioning that often results in unreliable confessions. False confessions have been obtained through prolonged and aggressive interrogations in various cases, where defendants who were later proven innocent were initially implicated.

When prosecutors mention that a defendant exercised their right to remain silent after being arrested, they undermine this crucial safeguard against government exploitation. For instance, prosecutors are not allowed to cross-examine a defendant regarding their post-arrest silence. The Supreme Court has ruled that using the arrestee's silence to undermine an explanation they provide later during the trial would be fundamentally unjust and a violation of their right to due process.

The same injustice arises when a prosecutor makes inappropriate remarks about a defendant's decision not to testify during the trial. The right against self-incrimination is nullified if a prosecutor can use a defendant's silence at trial as evidence against them. This places undue pressure on the defendant to testify, knowing that their silence will be used against them.

Contact an LA Criminal Defense Attorney Near Me

At the Los Angeles Criminal Lawyer, our dedication lies in exposing institutionalized unfairness and prosecutorial errors that lead to wrongful convictions. If a prosecutor's ethical transgressions have resulted in an unjust sentence, we are here to provide essential legal advice and assistance. With an unwavering dedication to truth and justice, we possess the necessary skills to uncover and rectify injustices. Throughout the years, we have established a solid track record of successfully securing the release of innocent individuals from prison and overturning wrongful convictions. Call us today at 310-502-1314.