Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Prosecutorial, Defense, And Judicial Misconduct. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 4 page paper that discusses the types of misconduct associated with prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges. Examples are provided. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: ME12_PG693212.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
depending on the behavior, could result in suspension, loss of license, or prison. The Center for Public Integrity has found that prosecutors across the nation "have stretched, bent,
or broken rules to win convictions" (Weinberg, 2003). In the last three decades, prosecutorial misconduct caused conviction reversal, sentence reduction, and charges dismissal in more than 2,000 cases (Law
Reader, 2011). Appellate judges concluded there was prosecutorial misconduct in another 500 cases (Weinberg, 2003). Prosecutorial misconduct leads to the wrong person being convicted of a crime. There is a
domino effect because when misconduct caused innocent people to be convicted, all cases tried by that attorney are reviewed. This can result in guilty people having their convictions overturned (Weinberg,
2003). The Center for Public Integrity also found that many prosecutors are guilty of misconduct numerous times so it becomes a habit for that lawyer (Weinberg, 2003).
Nels C. Moss Jr. was one of those types of prosecutors. There were at least 24 complaints regarding this prosecutors conduct and in seven of those cases, judges declared a
mistrial, reversed the conviction, or took other action against him (Weinberg, 2003). This particular prosecutor had: reneged on pre-trial stipulations during the actual trial; called the jurys attention to the
defendants failure to testify inferring that suggested guilt which violated the defendants Fifth Amendment rights; referred to the defendants criminal behaviors that had not been charged, which violated the rules
of evidence; attacked the defendants character by brining in information that was not entered into the courts record; used material that was not admissible when the material came from the
trail of the defendants accomplice, promised the jury certain evidence would be presented during opening statements but never presented that evidence; inferred the defense attorney was lying; inflamed the jurys
...