Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
After a mathematics instructor testified about the multiplication rule for probability, though ignoring conditional probability, the prosecutor invited the jury to consider the probability that the accused (who fit a witness's description of a black male with a beard and mustache and a Caucasian female with a blond ponytail, fleeing in a yellow car) were not the robbers, suggesting that they ...
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).
The case lasted seven years but resulted in no convictions, and all charges were dropped in 1990. By the case's end, it had become the longest and most expensive series of criminal trials in American history. [2] [3] The case was part of day-care sex-abuse hysteria, a moral panic over alleged Satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s and early 1990s.
Last year Price initiated an investigation into potential prosecutorial misconduct during jury selection in the case of Ernest Dykes, who was found guilty in 1993 of shooting a 9-year-old.
Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, by a 6–2 vote, that it is a violation of a defendant's Fifth Amendment rights for the prosecutor to comment to the jury on the defendant's declining to testify, or for the judge to instruct the jury that such silence is evidence of guilt.
A key hearing over allegations of prosecutorial misconduct will be held in the state's death penalty case against the El Paso Walmart mass shooter.
Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta accused Assistant Dist. Atty. Diana Teran of improperly downloading confidential records of deputies in 2018 while she was working for the L.A. County Sheriff's Department.
The Albany Law Review criticized this decision as outlining a "retaliation doctrine" that incentivizes both parties to not report misconduct if they believe it invites them to engage in similar misconduct. Law professor Martin Belsky argued that trials should instead maintain their fairness by requiring both sides to object to misconduct by the ...