Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In jurisprudence, prosecutorial misconduct or prosecutorial overreach is "an illegal act or failing to act, on the part of a prosecutor, especially an attempt to sway the jury to wrongly convict a defendant or to impose a harsher than appropriate punishment." [1] It is similar to selective prosecution. Prosecutors are bound by a set of rules ...
An abuse of process is the unjustified or unreasonable use of legal proceedings or process to further a cause of action by an applicant or plaintiff in an action. It is a claim made by the respondent or defendant that the other party is misusing or perverting regularly issued court process (civil or criminal) not justified by the underlying legal action.
A retaliatory arrest or retaliatory prosecution occurs when law enforcement or prosecutorial actions are initiated in response to an individual’s exercise of their civil rights, such as freedom of speech or assembly. These actions are considered forms of misconduct, as they aim to punish individuals for engaging in constitutionally protected ...
Prosecutorial misconduct claims escalate. Though it’s not unheard of for defense attorneys to try and have prosecutors removed, there has been an uptick since the very same judge ordered the ...
In United States criminal law, a perjury trap is a form of prosecutorial strategy, which is sometimes claimed to be prosecutorial misconduct in which a prosecutor calls a witness to testify, typically before a grand jury, with the intent of coercing the witness into perjury (intentional deceit under oath).
Jan. 25—CONCORD — A federal judge in New Hampshire has dismissed one criminal case, and a high-profile white-collar case hangs in the balance over questions about misconduct by a top federal ...
More: Key hearing over prosecutorial misconduct begins in Walmart shooting case: live updates Briggs said it is "extremely rare" for him to have to listen to jailhouse calls, and for the most part ...
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution's failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial. [1]