1. Chapter 7 - Questions Special Ethics Rules: Prosecutors and Judges

2. Question 7-1 A county prosecutor believes that Bill is a criminal mastermind who is responsible for most of the illegal drugs that are coming into the county and who is also responsible for at least ten murders. The prosecutor does not have enough evidence to obtain an indictment on those charges. But in his investigation, the prosecutor discovers that Bill lied on a form he filed with the government to obtain a zoning variance for his mansion. Lying to the government on a form is a felony, but it is a common activity and very rarely prosecuted. In fact, Bill would be the first person ever charged for this crime in the county. Can the prosecutor ethically bring charges against Bill for lying on a government form?

3. Question 7-2 Walker was arrested for violently robbing a man on the street, but the victim was unwilling to testify at trial. The prosecutor entered into plea bargaining discussions with Walker and his counsel. Walker was unwilling to accept a plea with jail time. He was previously convicted of rape, and so pleading guilty to theft would demand incarceration under applicable law. The prosecutor then offered a deal: if Walker would plead guilty to illegally recording music, the robbery charges would be dropped. Walker would receive a fine and would be credited with time served since his arrest. May the prosecutor ethically offer this plea arrangement when all agree that Walker would be pleading guilty to a crime he did not commit?

4. Question 7-3 A defendant has been charged with murder. The government's case is based mainly on the testimony of an eyewitness. The prosecutor and defense enter into plea negotiations. At that time, the prosecutor knows --- but the defendant does not --- that the eyewitness has died. If the prosecutor keeps this information secret, it is probable that the defendant will plead guilty to a crime with significant jail time. If the defendant is told about the death of the eyewitness, the prosecutor will be unlikely to get a plea to a crime with jail time. Is the prosecutor constitutionally or ethically required to disclose the death of the eyewitness?

5. Question 7-4 A trial court judge had instructed his court clerk and his secretary that one of them should be present in the office during working hours to answer the telephone. One day, however, the secretary was out sick. The judge was in his office when his court clerk was at lunch, and when the telephone rang, the judge answered it. The call was from a lawyer in a case presently pending before the judge. The lawyer was calling to attempt to reschedule a pretrial conference set for the next day because of a sudden family emergency. The lawyer had tried to call opposing counsel on the case, but she was not answering his calls. The judge agreed to reschedule the pretrial conference for the following week. When the judge's court clerk returned from lunch, the judge instructed the clerk to contact opposing counsel to inform her of the telephone call and the fact that the pretrial conference had been rescheduled. Did the judge act properly?

6. Question 7-5 A judge has served on a trial court of general jurisdiction for almost three years. During that time, he was assigned criminal cases almost exclusively. Several months ago, however, the judge was assigned an interesting case involving a constitutional challenge to a statute recently passed by the state legislature. The statute permitted any local public school district with an overcrowding problem to purchase educational services for its students in any other public or private school within fifteen miles. Although the briefs submitted by the parties were excellent, the judge was not confident that he had a good grasp of the issues in the case. Accordingly, he took one of his more experienced colleagues on the trial court out to lunch and discussed the case with her in great detail. The colleague was far more conservative than the judge, but he agreed with her and eventually ruled in accord with her views. The case is now on appeal. Is the judge subject to discipline?

7. Question 7-6 Judge, a state court judge, has presided over the pretrial proceedings in a case involving a novel contract question under the Uniform Commercial Code. During the pretrial proceedings, Judge has acquired considerable background knowledge of the facts and law of the matter and, therefore, is particularly well qualified to preside at the trial. Shortly before the trial date, Judge discovered that his brother owns a substantial block of stock in the defendant corporation. He determined that his brother’s financial interests would be substantially affected by the outcome of the case. Although Judge believed he would be impartial, he disclosed to the parties, on the record, his brother's interest. Is it proper for Judge to hear the case?

8. Question 7-7 Judge is a judge of the trial court in City. Judge has served for many years as a director of a charitable organization that maintains a camp for disadvantaged children. The organization has never been involved in litigation. Judge has not received any compensation for her services. The charity has decided to sponsor a public testimonial dinner in Judge's honor. As part of the occasion, the local bar association intends to commission and present to Judge her portrait at a cost of $4,000. The money to pay for the portrait will come from a "public testimonial fund" that will be raised by the City Bar Association from contributions of lawyers who are members of the association and who practice in the courts of City. Is it proper for Judge to accept the gift of the portrait?

9. Question 7-8 The state bar association has offered Judge and her spouse free transportation and lodging to attend its institute on judicial reform. Judge is expected to deliver a banquet speech. Is it proper for Judge to accept this offer?

10. Question 7-9 An attorney's law firm regularly represented a large company in its international business transactions. The company became involved in a contractual dispute with a foreign government. The company invoked a mandatory arbitration procedure contained in the contract. Under the arbitration clause, each party was allowed to choose a partisan arbitrator and the partisan arbitrators were to choose an additional arbitrator to sit on the panel. The company selected the attorney to be on the arbitration panel. Neither the attorney nor his law firm had represented the company in connection with the contract with the foreign government. The arbitration was completed, and the company was awarded the sum of $100,000. The company then hired the attorney to enforce the award. The attorney obtained the consent of the other arbitrators before accepting the representation. He was successful in enforcing the award. Is the attorney subject to discipline?