Threads

I personally do not think the opinion makes sense as it is premised on the idea thet there can be no punishment or retaliation in a give and take negotiation

i can understand the logic but i think it’s exactly what we should be angry about when it comes to prosecutors abusing their powers

have i arrived?

I'm with Blackmun on this one - I think it IS vindictive to acknowledge the appropriate charge and then raise it when the defendant refuses to take it

@rigel I agree!

The court seems to agree as well, just that there

is no other way to do it.

and perhaps it’s why we should be having grand juries limit charges prosecutors can bring

If this is what a prosecutor does to "abuse power" then how should a prosecutor act generally?

At least if they had to announce their charge to the public they's have to really think they could prove it and face down the appearance of overcharging.

Defendant can't win. Prosecutor either upcharges and pleas down or downcharges and pleas up.

In a perfect world every case goes to trial and prosecutor asks for fair sentences

fair and appropriate? these terms have no substance

But doesn't he pay a political price for overcharging when it's up front?

^not if people are fans of "tough on crime"

I don't believe he does always as being tough on crime wins you political points

Popular pressure seems like a wider form of nullification.

There is no "give and take" if the prosecutor just takes.

in that case the prosecutor would overcharge anyway, no?

So the real issue is....unlimited discretion haha

Also one could say prosecutor isn't overcharging, he's just going by book. Doing D a favor by offering the deal

Defendant can win by not committing a felony in the first place

This particular defendant Luyten? Or defendants in general

If we imagine a grand jury to be a constraint on overcharging, and jury nullification a constraint on overcharging, then popular response to overcharging, by whatever standard the 'public' perception of overcharging is, will be at least some constraint of the prosecution.

Yet the grand juries almost always indict and the petite juries almost never nullify

The court

hayes if i’m not mistaken also highlights the problem with mandatory minimum sentences and taking the power of sentencing discretion away from judges and giving it to the prosecutor

^^agreed

when do we go back into main group?

concept of equality in bargaining power seems a joke: the prosecutor risks losing a case by reason of overcharging. the defendant risks prison or death penalty for going to trial.

All threads

All of the threads for this selected topic

Of what is this 'evidence'?

Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo

Feedback [11-30-20]

Thanksgiving Thread

Peremptory Challenges [11-23-2020]

Feedback [11-17-20]

Your questions, doubts and concerns about confrontation and cross as core jury process.

Feedback November 10

Feedback [11-09-20]

Discussion Group 2 [11-9-2020]

Discussion Group 1 [11-9-2020]

Election Night

George Fisher Caves [11-03-2020]

Group 1 [11-03-2020]

Group 2 [11-03-2020]

Group 3 [11-03-2020]

Feedback 11-2-2020

Feedback 10-27-2020

Discussion 10-27-2020

Feedback 10-26-2020

Hypothetical 10-19-20

Feedback 10-20-2020

Feedback 10-19-20

Surveillance 10-19-20

Feedback October 13, 2020

i&i

REVIEW - October 13, 2020. Please offer questions and concerns.

Feedback Oct 6, 2020 - violence of discussion for some

Feedback October 6, 2020

Feedback Oct 5, 2020 Fair

Gatecrasher - Who Wins?

Blue Bus

Conjunction --In what order should we decide the elements of the alleged crime?

Prison Yard - Can WE prosecute all of them?

Feedback [09-29-20]

Would you be interested in joining together in threads while watching the Trump-Biden debate?

feedback sept 28

What is your biggest fear going forward?

BIAS (in judgmen)t

Feedback #1

racism - anti-racism

what is your passion?

What do you feel you have to learn about fair trial? Do you feel that fair trial matters?

Give Thanks

Active thread

Only the replies to the one thread you selected