Prosecutorial Misconduct in Texas - Essay Example

Prosecutorial Misconduct in Texas A prosecutor responsibility in criminal justice system is enormous and essential in the final passing of a judgment. In the modern world, prosecutor’s role starts from the start of the investigation to the conclusion of the trial. A prosecutor role includes initiation of investigation, decision on which file have a case for trials, when charges would begin and responsibility of deciding whether there will be a plea for any form of leniency. In the United States where there is federal system of government and federal courts it is the responsibility of the prosecutor to determine the sentence of the defendant (Davis, 2007). However, this system has led to abuse of this power by the prosecutor in federal courts and in many other states. Moreover, some prosecutors have conducted themselves in a manner that can be said to be dubious and this has led to the defense team being dissatisfied. This is the worst form of violation of individual rights and there should be option to rectify such anomaly. It is the prerogative of the judicial mechanism to see the rights of the defendant as enshrined in the constitution are protected. The process prior to the beginning of trials should be maintained as distinct as it is required by both fourth and fifth amendments. Mostly prosecutor deal’s with defendant and the attorney representing such individuals. However, misconduct of the prosecutor may take place even without the contact of the defendant and legal counsel. Usually in the United States, it is the prerogative of the court to decide whether prosecutor committed particular crime or not by establishing the intent in a particular case. However, an exception occurs when the fifth and six amendment is invoked. In the constitution, there is an alternative in case any violation occurs because of poor police investigations. However, there is no clause that provides steps to be taken in case a prosecutor is found to have violated the constitutional rights of the defendants. Additionally it is more challenging to identify the outcome of prosecutorial misconduct than illegally acquired evidence gotten from an improper interrogation. Various issues arise out of the phrase ‘prosecutorial misconduct’ especially whether a prosecutorial misconduct should have a particular penalty depending on the level of harm caused to the defendants (Davis, 2007). This paper seeks to discuss prosecutorial misconduct in Texas. Prosecutorial misconduct has become rampant in different states of America. Texas is one of the states that have been faced by this challenge and this has led to several appeals in state of Texas. Majority of these appeals have reverted the decision made earlier by the court due to massive anomalies that have been cited in these higher courts. Prosecutorial misconduct is unnecessary or unlawful behavior by a prosecutor. Such behavior is usually unlawful in the area where certain prosecutor carries daily activities. Moreover, such misconduct may be because of going against particular rules or established code of conduct in a particular state. Prosecutors usually have an edge in many criminal proceedings and this singular role is vested on them. On the other hand, common person lacks rights to institute any criminal proceedings. Consequently, it is the responsibility of a prosecutor to behave in a way that is not questionable as any criminal proceedings carries with it higher potential sanctions. There are some prohibitions that prosecutor must adhere to, they includes not tampering with witness for a purpose of gaining ground to particular case. Any violation of law by a prosecutor, which leads to an improper act, qualifies to be a prosecutorial misconduct. Mostly, it is punishable by deregistration from practicing law. Any misconduct that is of high stake can lead to criminal charges due to disrespect of the court. In Texas, prosecutors are bound to adhere to code of professional responsibility. If a prosecutor fails to adhere to the code of professional conduct this is another form of prosecutorial misconduct. However, such misconduct is only punishable by deregistration but no criminal proceedings can be instituted against the prosecutor. High standards are set to protect the defendant rights to a fair trial (Gershman, 2008). In the state of Texas, the rate of prosecutorial misconduct is increasing at an alarming rate. Actually, thousands of wrongful trials and convictions have been cited as prosecutors employ all the necessary means to win a particular case. Prosecutors have abused their responsibilities to the detriment of both the defendant and sometimes the litigant. Thus, it is the authority of the Texas court to hold prosecutor accountable as they violate the law or other form of malpractice. The state makes it mandatory for the prosecutor to disclose all the evidence either associating or exculpatory. However, it is in the public domain that the state of Texas is vulnerable to many cases of prosecutor misconduct. In Texas states, prosecutors have been found culpable of holding back evidence that was exculpatory. For example, in a case of Michel Morton the prosecutor had evidence that that was enough to ensure the innocence of Morton but decided not to expose this evidence during trial period. This was devastating to Morton who was convicted over his wife’s death. Morton spent twenty-five years in jail before the defense team fought protracted battle in court for his release. Moreover, a former attorney who had practiced law for a long time was found withholding evidence. Many other judgments in Texas have recently been found to have been made based on misconstrued evidence manipulated by the office of the prosecutor. Such cases include Dale Lincoln Duke, Antony Graves, Chelsea Richardson and many more (Sands et al, 2010). Groundwork data indicate that an appeal court established a prosecutor had misconduct in line of duty but was not penalized. Additionally, 91 criminal case proceeded even after prosecutor misbehaved in terms of concealing evidence or unwarranted argument to jury (Wasserman, 2011). Even after a high prevalence of prosecutors’ misconduct in the state of Texas the number of prosecutors who have been reprimanded is yet to be established and nearly all of them walk to freedom. This conduct is also a matter of concern as individual right and freedom is infringed against the constitution demand for a free and fair trial. The high rate of prosecutorial misconduct in the state of Texas is a matter of great concern. Furthermore, it is clear that a decision made by court takes a process to reverse. Additionally, in a criminal trial the life and liberty of defendant is usually at stake hence conduct of prosecutor is a crucial process for justice to be realized. In addition, the number of years spent in jail by an inmate wrongly convicted is high and likely to drain the person and family emotionally (Kleinig, 2008). In conclusion, the injustice in the state of Texas is a matter of great concern that needs to be addressed as fast as possible. It is also clear that most of prosecutors in this state have no clear mechanism of checking and analyzing various forms of misconduct that arise in criminal justice system. There is also a high level of inaction by the bar to these rogue prosecutors. Those cases that have been analyzed may not be exhaustive but serve as evidence that the office of prosecutor need another perspective from defendant, litigant, and defense counsel. Moreover, step taken in punishment of rogue prosecutor include disbarment, suspension and a limited time of professional probation. Others include public reprimand and criticism. However, this is not enough and it should be clear there is individual right for free and fair trial. References Davis.A. (2007). Arbitrary Justice: The Power of the American Prosecutor. London: Oxford University Press. Gershman, B. (2008). Prosecutorial misconduct. New York: West Group. Kleinig, J. (2008). Ethics and Criminal Justice: An Introduction. London: Cambridge University Press. Sands, J et al. (2010). Prosecutorial Misconduct. Retrieved from http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/prosecutorial%20misconduct.pdf. Wasserman, H. (2011). Institutional Failures: Duke Lacrosse, Universities, the News Media, and the Legal System. London : Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Read More