Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
5.2.1 Selective prosecution. ... Such cases have come to comprise a substantial portion of the Supreme Court's docket. Article Three. Jury Clause
The Kern County child abuse cases are a notable example of day-care sex-abuse hysteria of the 1980s. [112] The cases involved claims that a pedophile sex ring performed Satanic ritual abuse: as many as 60 young children testified they had been abused. At least 36 people were convicted and most of them spent years imprisoned. 34 convictions were ...
The prosecution had withheld a written statement by Boblit (the men were tried separately), confessing that he had committed the act of killing by himself. The Maryland Court of Appeals had affirmed the conviction and remanded the case for a retrial only on the question of punishment. Brady's lawyer, E. Clinton Bamberger Jr., appealed the case ...
The right to private prosecution in federal cases was removed following the 1981 Supreme Court decision in Leeke v. Timmerman, affirming an earlier decision in Linda R. S. v. Richard D.. [28] However, a federal prosecutor may appoint a private attorney to prosecute a case. [29] Elsewhere, private prosecution is governed by state laws.
The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). [2] The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case.
While several early cases employed the "intangible right to honest government," United States v. States (8th Cir. 1973) [9] was the first case to rely on honest services fraud as the sole basis for a conviction. [10] The prosecution of state and local political corruption became a "major federal law enforcement priority" in the 1970s. [11 ...
Although both the prosecution and the defense appealed the judgment and the sentence, both parties discontinued their appeals on 25 June 2014, thus ending the proceedings. [172] On 13 November 2015, a panel of judges from the Appeals Chamber reduced Katanga's sentence of 12 years' imprisonment by 3 years and 8 months. [ 29 ]
The Court found an "inflexible presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness" to be inappropriate in the pretrial setting, where a prosecutor's case against a defendant may not yet have "crystallized." [ 11 ] Following the Court's ruling, lower federal courts have generally held a presumption of vindictiveness to be inapplicable in a pretrial ...