Unit 6 The Trial: Players, Motions, Hearings, and Pleas Or I am getting my day in court

Unit 6  What needs to be done this week SeminarSeminar QuizQuiz Discussion boardDiscussion board Analysis and ApplicationAnalysis and Application  Please read and follow the instructions  Answer all of the questions

Pretrial Discovery  No trial by ambush  Reports, List of Witnesses  Statements of Witnesses and Defendant  Any promises or incentives  Both sides have obligations to disclose and tender

Prosecution discovery  Must tender all Brady material (Brady v. Maryland)  Evidence that may negate the guilt of an offender  Violation will result in a case being overturned and the Prosecutor facing ethics charges

Defense Discovery  Basically same as prosecution  Notify Prosecution of defense to be raised Self defense, alibi, insanity, burden of proofSelf defense, alibi, insanity, burden of proof Right against self incriminationRight against self incrimination  Not need to disclose consulting experts not to be called at trial

Pretrial Motions  Motions to suppress Evidence obtained in violation of 4 th Amendment- exclusionary ruleEvidence obtained in violation of 4 th Amendment- exclusionary rule Motions to suppress statementsMotions to suppress statements  Coerced, violation of Miranda (not given, waived or understood)-remedy? Motions to Suppress IdentificationMotions to Suppress Identification

Plea Negotiations aka Plea Bargains  Necessary evil in criminal justice  Incentive to plea not punishment for exercising constitutional right to trial  Charges dismissed or reduced or recommended sentence in exchange for plea  Must be approved by the Trial Judge

Hearsay  A statement, other than one made by the declarant, while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.  Usually not admissible

Hearsay Exceptions  Are they reliable?  Statement against penal interest- confession  Statement by party opponent  Co conspirator statement during course of conspiracy  Dying declaration, spontaneous utterance  Statements to medical personnel  Business Records

Rape Shield statutes  Prevents defense from inquiring into past sexual history or reputation of the victim  Intended to avoid the victim from being placed on trial  Exceptions such as past relationship between victim and defendant or other relevant issue Kobe Bryant, Duke Lacrosse caseKobe Bryant, Duke Lacrosse case

Competency of witnesses  Witnesses assumed to be competent to testify- ability to recall, relate and understand oath-cf child witnesses  Lay witnesses can testify what personally saw or heard- No hearsay and limited opinion testimony  Expert Witnesses- if qualified can testify regarding their opinion on matter they examined or on hypothetical facts

Adversary system of due process  Each side has right to present evidence or testimony  Opposing side can contest and cross examine. Right of confrontation  Right to subpoena witnesses and evidence and to compel testimony  Witness not appear or not testify without legal reason can be held in contempt of court

Roles of parties  Victim and defendant  Prosecutor and defense attorneys- private, court appointed or Public Defender  Right of self representation  Finder of fact- Judge or jury?  6 th Amendment right of Defendant Can the prosecution request a jury?Can the prosecution request a jury?

Prosecutor  Primary role is to seek justice, not conviction  Entrusted by government to try offenders charged with crime  Responsible for case once booked into court though can be involved in charging decision

Defense attorney  Role is to zealously represent client within bounds of law  No responsibility to seek justice  Ethically prohibited to suborn perjury or to present fabricated testimony  Can represent those who they know are guilty

Attorney Client Privilege  Prohibited from disclosing conversations with their client regarding matters they represents them on. Purpose to promote honest and open communication  No privilege for future crimes or fraud  Andrew Wilson case