Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional 11th Edition

1
Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice
Professional 11th Edition

• John N. Ferdico
• Henry F. Fradella
• Christopher Totten

Criminal Courts, Pretrial Processes, and The
Exclusionary Rule Chapter 2
Prepared by Tony Wolusky
2
Structure of the U.S. Court System
3
Structure of the U.S. Court Systems
4
Federalism and the Dual Court System

• The Constitution of the United States recognizes
  a unique interrelationship between the states and
  the federal government, known as federalism.
• The federal government has power over national
  matters, while states maintain their separate
  existence and power over local matters.
• Each state, as well as the District of Columbia
  and the federal government, has its own separate
  court system, each with its own limited
  jurisdictional authority.

5
Jurisdiction

• Jurisdiction, the power of court to hear and
  decide a case, depends on
• Geographical location and venue
• Structure of court system and courts placement
  in the judicial hierarchy
• Trial courts are original jurisdiction courts,
  and appellate courts have appellate jurisdiction.
• Trials my be jury trials or bench trials.
• Appellate courts review lower court decisions.
• Subject matter
• Courts of limited or specialized jurisdiction
  hear only specific cases.

6
Federal Courts

• The basic structure of the federal courts
  includes
• Specialized courts
• Trial level courts
• Intermediate courts of appeal
• The United States Supreme Courtthe court of last
  resort

7
Federal District Courts

• District Courts are the trial courts for the
  federal court system.
• There are of ninety-four district courts in the
  fifty states, the District of Columbia, the
  Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories
  of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the
  Northern Mariana Islands.
• Each state has at least one district court some
  of the larger states have as many as four.

8
Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals

• The United States Circuit Courts of Appeals are
  the intermediate appellate courts of the federal
  system.
• They review the decisions of federal trial courts
  and review and enforce orders of many federal
  administrative bodies.
• The decisions of the courts of appeals are final,
  except that they are subject to discretionary
  review or appeal in the U.S. Supreme Court.
• The U.S. is divided into thirteen circuits.

9
The U.S. Supreme Court

• The United States Supreme Court is the court of
  last resort in the federal court system.
• There are eight justices and one chief justice,
  all serving life terms.
• It is mainly an appellate court, but has original
  jurisdiction over some matters.
• Appeals are heard through granting of a writ or
  certiorari.
• Certiorari is granted at the Courts discretion.

10
Non-Article III Federal Courts

• Non-Article III Federal Courts are specialized
  courts of limited subject matter jurisdiction.
  Examples are
• U.S. Court of International Trade
• U.S. Court of Federal Claims
• U.S. Tax Court
• U.S. Court of Military Appeals
• There are also quasi-judicial boards or
  commissions that have special and limited
  jurisdiction under specific federal statutes.

11
State Courts

• The constitution and statutes of each state
  dictate the structure of their individual court
  systems. A typical state court system has the
  same basic structure as the federal system.
• Trial courts (includes courts of limited
  jurisdiction and courts of general jurisdiction)
• Intermediate appellate courts
• Court of last resort

12
Preliminary Pretrial Criminal Proceedings
13
Charging

• Police arrest prosecutors charge.
• A prosecutor has broad discretion in determining
  
• When to bring charges
• Whether to investigate
• Whether to grant immunity
• Whether to plea bargain, and, if so, the type of
  plea which will ultimately be acceptable
• Discretion can be abused, as in selective
  prosecution and vindictive prosecution.

14
ChargingCounty prosecutors are generally
elected and prosecutors may aggressively
prosecute sex offenders by refusing to plea
bargain in order to appear more electable. Do you
think that electing prosecutors is a compromise
of justice? Why or why not?Prosecutors are
considered the most powerful people in the
criminal justice system. This is because
prosecutor can decide whether to pursue criminal
charges, went to plea bargain, and what sentences
to recommend. Do you think prosecutors have too
much influence on the process? Why or why not?
15
ChargingThe Prosecutor

• http//www.wadsworthmedia.com/cj/cjnow/lm/Prosecut
  ion/

16
The Complaint

• A criminal process against a felony defendant
  formally begins with a complaint, a written
  statements of the facts supporting the offense.
  The complaint
• Must be made on oath or affirmation
• Must state the essential facts of the offense
  being charged
• Must be in writing
• Must be made before a judicial officer authorized
  to issue process in criminal cases
• May be supported by an affidavit

17
Warrant or Summons Issued on the Complaint

• Once the magistrate has determined from the
  complaint and accompanying affidavits that there
  is probable cause to believe that an offense has
  been committed and that the defendant committed
  it, the magistrate issues either a summons or an
  arrest warrant for the defendant's appearance in
  court.

18
Initial Appearance

• An person arrested without a warrant is required
  to be brought before a magistrate "without
  unnecessary delay," for an initial appearance.
• Also called a Gerstein hearing, it is a judicial
  determination of probable cause.
• An initial appearance is unnecessary if a grand
  jury has already returned an indictment.
• The initial appearance may include a preliminary
  hearing.

19
Preliminary Hearing

• At the preliminary hearing, the magistrate
  determines if there is probable cause to believe
  that a felony was committed and that the
  defendant committed it.
• Formal adversarial procedure in open court.
• Not required for petty offenses or misdemeanors.
• May be waived by the defendant.
• Indigent defendants are entitled to
  representation.
• If probable cause exists, the magistrate binds
  over the defendant for trial.

20
Grand Jury

• The federal government and some states require a
  grand jury indictment for certain crimes. The
  primary duty of the grand jury is
• To receive complaints in criminal cases,
• To hear the evidence put forth by the state, and
• To return an indictment if probable cause that
  the defendant committed an offense is
  established.
• Grand juries are non-adversarial and
• Use 16-23 grand jurors.
• Require a consensus of grand jurors before
  reaching and indictment.

21
Indictments and Informations

• In felony cases in jurisdictions that have a
  grand jury system, an indictment replaces the
  complaint as the charging document upon which the
  defendant is brought to trial.
• In jurisdictions that do not require indictments
  or when a grand jury hearing was waived, felony
  trials may proceed using an informationa
  charging document signed and sworn to only by the
  prosecuting attorney.
• Indictments may be handed down before a person is
  taken into custody.

22
Indictments and Informations

• In felony cases in jurisdictions that have a
  grand jury system, an indictment replaces the
  complaint as the charging document upon which the
  defendant is brought to trial.
• In jurisdictions that do not require indictments
  or when a grand jury hearing was waived, felony
  trials may proceed using an informationa
  charging document signed and sworn to only by the
  prosecuting attorney.
• Indictments may be handed down before a person is
  taken into custody.

23
Arraignment and Pleas

• After the issuance of a true bill on the
  indictment or a bind over order in the
  preliminary hearing, the next step is the
  arraignment. At arraignment, the defendant
  enters a plea. Types of pleas include
• Guilty
• Not guilty
• Nolo contendere (no contest)
• Not guilty by reason of insanity (available in
  most jurisdictions)

24
Impact of Guilty/Nolo Contendere Pleas

• A defendant pleading guilty or nolo contendere,
  waives many constitutional rights, including
• The right to a trial by jury
• The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses
• The right to compel the attendance and testimony
  of witnesses
• The right to testify on one's own behalf
• The right to be free from being forced to
  incriminate oneself
• The right to be presumed innocent until proven
  guilty
• The right to appeal one's conviction.

25
Plea Bargaining

• Plea bargaining is an essential component of the
  administration of justice.
• Plea bargaining is the disposition of criminal
  charges by agreement between the prosecutor and
  the accused.

26
Preparing for Trial

• Preparing for trials may include preparing
• Motions
• Depositions
• Participating in discovery
• Finding exculpatory evidence
• Searching for impeachment material
• Determining who/what to subpoena
• Determining the defendants competency to stand
  trial

27
The Exclusionary Rule
28
The Rule

• The exclusionary rule requires that any evidence
  obtained by police using methods that violate a
  persons constitutional rights must be excluded
  from use in a criminal prosecution against that
  person.
• Rule developed in 1914, Weeks v. U.S.
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961) extended it to the states.
• Deters Fourth Amendment violations.
• Does not apply to evidence obtained illegally by
  a private citizen, unless the private citizen
  acts as an agent of the police.

29
Alternatives to the Exclusionary Rule

• There are possible alternatives to the
  exclusionary rule
• Conducting an illegal search and seizure could be
  designated as a crime.
• An officer who makes an illegal search and
  seizure may be subject to internal departmental
  disciplinary procedures.
• Victims of unconstitutional actions by police
  officers may also bring civil lawsuits against
  offending officers.
• Victims of unconstitutional actions by federal
  officers may also be able to sue the U.S.
  government.

30
Criticisms of the Exclusionary Rule

• Criticisms of the exclusionary rule include the
  following
• That individual police officers are not
  personally impacted by the exclusion of evidence
  they obtained unconstitutionally.
• That police officers are not deterred because few
  prosecutions against the officers come about as a
  result of illegal seizure.
• It allows some factually guilty individuals to go
  free.

31
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine

• Under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine,
  evidence is inadmissible in court if it was
  directly or indirectly obtained by exploitation
  of some prior unconstitutional police activity
  (such as an illegal arrest or search). Evidence
  directly or indirectly obtained in this manner is
  called tainted evidence.

32
Exceptions to the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
Doctrine

• The fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine does not
  require suppression of the tainted evidence if
• The evidence was also obtained through a source
  wholly independent of the primary constitutional
  violation,
• The evidence inevitably would have been
  discovered by some other lawful means already in
  process (inevitable discovery), or
• The means of obtaining the tainted evidence were
  sufficiently remote from and distinguishable from
  the primary illegality.

33
The Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule

• Under the good-faith exception to the
  exclusionary rule, evidence obtained by police
  who acted in good faith in objectively reasonable
  reliance on a warrant or statute is admissible,
  even though the warrant or statute is
  subsequently determined to be invalid.

34
Standing to Assert an Exclusionary Rule Claim

• To have standing to invoke the exclusionary rule
  challenging the admissibility of evidence, a
  defendants own constitutional rights must have
  been allegedly violated in obtaining the
  evidence.