Author Topic: Defendant's 4th Supplemental Discovery  (Read 4642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's 4th Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #15 on: May 31, 2013, 06:55:46 AM »
Since either side can file such an appeal, how does bias toward the prosecution do that?

Not either side can file an appeal.    Well, I guess they can file them, but defense (interlocutory) appeals will be dismissed where state (interlocutory) appeals will be heard.

The state has an advantage in having its interlocutory appeals heard, because it only gets one bite at the apple.  If the trial court gives a reversible advantage to the defendant, and the defendant is acquitted, the state is done, fini.  Double Jeopardy attaches.  So, the appeals court will hear state appeals before and during the trial, on matters where it would not take up exactly the same argument if it was presented by the defense.

The appeals court can, if defendant is convicted on an error, vacate the conviction and remand the case to the trial court for a new trial.

Convictions can be reversed on appeal.  Acquittals cannot.

Offline annoyedbeyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's 4th Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #16 on: May 31, 2013, 11:04:44 AM »
Not either side can file an appeal.    Well, I guess they can file them, but defense (interlocutory) appeals will be dismissed where state (interlocutory) appeals will be heard.

The state has an advantage in having its interlocutory appeals heard, because it only gets one bite at the apple.  If the trial court gives a reversible advantage to the defendant, and the defendant is acquitted, the state is done, fini.  Double Jeopardy attaches.  So, the appeals court will hear state appeals before and during the trial, on matters where it would not take up exactly the same argument if it was presented by the defense.

The appeals court can, if defendant is convicted on an error, vacate the conviction and remand the case to the trial court for a new trial.

Convictions can be reversed on appeal.  Acquittals cannot.

Thanks. I have to say though: it seems like taking a defendant who's presumed innocent etc, then the court specifically stacking the deck in favor of the prosecution seems...wrong somehow.

Especially when one considers the costs (financial costs especially but other costs as well) on an individual not funded by the taxpayers.


Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Defendant's 4th Supplemental Discovery
« Reply #17 on: May 31, 2013, 11:12:08 AM »
Thanks. I have to say though: it seems like taking a defendant who's presumed innocent etc, then the court specifically stacking the deck in favor of the prosecution seems...wrong somehow.

Especially when one considers the costs (financial costs especially but other costs as well) on an individual not funded by the taxpayers.

The defendant has that double jeopardy advantage.

The system is yanked way out of shape when a prosecutor is acting unethically (insufficient evidence for probable cause, deliberately withholding exculpatory evidence, threatening witnesses, or whatever), and slightly out of shape when the evidence is weak but supports probable cause.

What looks (maybe even is) like a systematic deck stack is, IMO, just a way to lament a strongly biased judge and/or an unethical prosecutor.  In the universe of cases, where the evidence is reasonably strong, these systematic biases and burdens work surprisingly well.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking