Law Commons^™

A Fiduciary Theory Of Progressive Prosecution, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

Progressive prosecutors differ from their more traditional counterparts primarily in the way in which they make decisions. They tend to bind their discretion by announcing categorical policies rather than making fact-based decisions case by case. This article catalogs the unusual degree of pushback progressive prosecutors have encountered from the public, legislatures, courts, police, and their own subordinate prosecutors. Drawing on fiduciary theory, it explains this reaction as a response to progressive prosecutors’ abdication of their fiduciary role. As a public fiduciary, prosecutors are entrusted with protecting the public’s abstract interest in justice, and an integral part of this role is …

Creating A Better, Fairer Criminal Justice System, David A. Harris, Created And Presented Jointly By Students From State Correctional Institution - Greene, Waynesburg, Pa, And University Of Pittsburgh School Of Law, Chief Editor: David A. Harris

Articles

In the Fall 2022 semester, 14 law (Outside) students from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and 14 incarcerated (Inside) students at the State Correctional Institution at Greene, in Waynesburg, Pennsylvania, took a full-semester class together called "Issues in Criminal Justice and the Law." The class, taught and facilitated by Professor David Harris, utilized the Inside-Out Prison Exchange Program pedagogy, emphasizing dialogic learning and peer teaching. The semester culminated with a group project, with the topic selected by the students: "creating a better, fairer criminal justice system." Members of the class organized themselves into small groups, each working for …

Depoliticizing Federal Prosecution, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

There is broad agreement that federal prosecutors should not use their power to pursue partisan political objectives, but there is stark disagreement about how to prevent them from abusing their power in this way. Geoffrey Berman, a former United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, recently argued that U.S. Attorneys should have complete autonomy and independence from the Attorney General and administration. Attorney General Bill Barr, in contrast, has insisted that Attorneys General should have full control over prosecutors so the administration can be held politically accountable. Neither view fully addresses the problem. Barr minimizes the significant …

The Race To The Top To Reduce Prosecutorial Misconduct, Adam M. Gershowitz

Faculty Publications

This Essay offers an unconventional approach to deterring prosecutorial misconduct. Trial judges should use their inherent authority to forbid prosecutors from appearing and handling cases in their courtrooms until the prosecutors have completed training on Brady v. Maryland, Batson v. Kentucky, and other types of prosecutorial misconduct. If a single trial judge in a medium-sized or large jurisdiction imposes training prerequisites on prosecutors, it could set off a race to the top that encourages other judges to adopt similar (or perhaps even more rigorous) training requirements. A mandate that prosecutors receive ethics training before handling any cases is …

Playing By The Rule: How Aba Model Rule 8.4(G) Can Regulate Jury Exclusion, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Discrimination during voir dire remains a critical impediment to empaneling juries that reflect the diversity of the United States. While various solutions have been proposed, scholars have largely overlooked ethics rules as an instrument for preventing discriminatory behavior during jury selection. Focusing on the ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), which regulates professional misconduct, this article argues that ethics rules can, under certain conditions, offer an effective deterrent to exclusionary practices among legal actors. Part I examines the specific history, evolution, and application of revised ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). Part II delves into the ways that ethics rules in general, despite their …

Regulating Prosecutors’ Courtroom Misconduct, Bruce A. Green

Faculty Scholarship

Trial prosecutors’ visible misbehavior, such as improper questioning of witnesses and improper jury arguments, may not seem momentous. Sometimes, the improprieties are simply the product of poor training or overenthusiasm. In many cases, they pass unremarked. As the Chicago Eight trial illustrated, trial prosecutors’ improprieties may also be overshadowed by the excesses of other trial participants—the witnesses, the defendants, the defense lawyers, or even the trial judge. And when noticed, prosecutors’ trial misbehavior can ordinarily be remedied, and then restrained, by a capable trial judge. It is little wonder that disciplinary authorities, having bigger fish to fry, are virtually indifferent …

Between Brady Discretion And Brady Misconduct, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s decision in Brady v. Maryland presented prosecutors with new professional challenges. In Brady, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution must provide the defense with any evidence in its possession that could be exculpatory. If the prosecution fails to timely turn over evidence that materially undermines the defendant’s guilt, a reviewing court must grant the defendant a new trial. While determining whether evidence materially undermines a defendant’s guilt may seem like a simple assessment, the real-life application of such a determination can be complicated. The prosecution’s disclosure determination can be complicated under the Brady paradigm because the …

Disciplinary Regulation Of Prosecutorial Discretion: What Would A Rule Look Like?, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

This Essay is the third part of a larger project examining the potential role of professional discipline in the regulation and supervision of prosecutors’ charging decisions. The first two parts of the project argued that courts have both the authority and the ability to exercise effective disciplinary review of charging decisions through the adoption of ethics rules and their enforcement in the disciplinary process. This Essay takes the next step in the project, considering the nature of rules that courts might adopt, by exploring potential rules targeting two improprieties: arbitrary and capricious charging decisions, and discriminatory charging decisions.

Policing The Prosecutor: Race, The Fourth Amendment, And The Prosecution Of Criminal Cases, Renee Mcdonald Hutchins

Journal Articles

As this article explores, while the Fourth Amendment is commonly criticized for the discretion it affords police officers, an overlooked result of the amendment’s lax regulation of the police is the enhanced power it affords prosecutors. Though for a time a warrant was the notional measure of reasonableness, over the last century the Court has crafted several exceptions to that measure to give the police greater leeway during on-the-street encounters. The Court has concurrently retreated from robust application of the exclusionary rule to remedy constitutional violations. These shifts have meant far more predictable wins for the prosecution at the suppression …

May Federal Prosecutors Take Direction From The President?, Bruce Green, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

Suppose the president sought to serve as prosecutor-in-chief telling prosecutors when to initiate or dismiss criminal charges in individual cases and making other discretionary decisions that are normally reserved to trained professionals familiar with the facts, law, and traditions of the U.S. Department of Justice. To what extent may prosecutors follow the president's direction? In recent presidential administrations, the president has respected prosecutorial independence; while making policy decisions, the president deferred to the Attorney General and subordinate federal prosecutors to conduct individual criminal cases. In a recent article, we argued that this is as it should be because the president …

Culture As A Structural Problem In Indigent Defense, Eve Brensike Primus

Articles

In Part I, I will describe the ways in which today's right-to-counsel challenges are similar to and different from those that faced the writers of the 1961 symposium. I will also explain in more detail why the structural conditions of criminal defense work to create (and, to some extent, always have created) a cultural problem in indigent defense delivery systems across the country. In Part II, I will discuss why I believe that we are, once again, facing a moment for potential reform, albeit reform that is different in scope and kind from that which was possible in the 1960s. …

The Prosecutor’S Duty Of Silence, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Prosecutors enjoy broad opportunities to communicate with the public outside the courtroom. Justice Holmes’s famous dictum -- “The theory of our system is that conclusions to be reached in a case will be induced only by evidence and argument in open court, and not by any outside influence, whether of private talk or public print” – is just that – a “theory.” The reality is otherwise. Prosecutors, and defense lawyers too, engage in extrajudicial speech frequently, and often irresponsibly. But in contrast to other lawyers, prosecutors have a higher “special” duty to serve justice rather than a private client. And …

In Memory Of Monroe Freedman: The Hardest Question For A Prosecutor, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

I’ve chosen to honor Monroe Freedman’s iconic essay on the hardest questions for a criminal defense attorney by posing the same question for prosecutors. What is the hardest question for a prosecutor? This in itself is a hard question. The thousands of federal, state, and local prosecutors in the country would likely give widely varying responses – discretionary charging, immunity grants, bargained pleas, unreliable witnesses, police testimony, and disclosure duties, for starters. Too, prosecutors are not a generic group. Just as some defense lawyers might recoil or be indifferent to Freedman’s provocative thesis, so might many prosecutors reject or be …

Can Prosecutors Be Both Coach And Referee?, Rebecca Roiphe

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Judicial Rhetoric & Lawyers' Roles, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

Notwithstanding the rich scholarly literature debating the proper roles of lawyers and the precise contours of lawyers’ ethical conduct, as a descriptive matter, the American legal system operates as an adversarial system, premised in part upon clear demarcations between the functions of different lawyers within the system. Broadly speaking, prosecutors have the distinct role of serving justice, which includes the duty to try to convict criminal defendants who are deserving of punishment, in a way that is consistent with both substantive and procedural justice. In contrast, private attorneys have a duty to zealously represent the best interests of their clients, …

Threats And Bullying By Prosecutors, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Essay describes ten contexts in which prosecutors make threats and behave like bullies. Some of these contexts are familiar, such as grand jury proceedings or plea discussions, where threats are generally upheld. Threats in other contexts are not as easy to justify, such as threats to obtain testimony from prosecution witnesses, retaliating for the exercise of constitutional rights, forcing a waiver of civil rights claims, and publicly humiliating people. Other threats clearly are illegitimate and unethical, such as threats that drive defense witnesses off the stand, bringing criminal charges against outspoken critics and defense experts, and …

The Prosecutor’S Contribution To Wrongful Convictions, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

A prosecutor is viewed by the public as a powerful law enforcement official whose responsibility is to convict guilty people of crimes. But not everybody understands that a prosecutor’s function is not only to win convictions of law-breakers. A prosecutor is a quasi-judicial official who has a duty to promote justice to the entire community, including those people charged with crimes. Indeed, an overriding function of a prosecutor is to ensure that innocent people not get convicted and punished.

A prosecutor is constitutionally and ethically mandated to promote justice. The prosecutor is even considered a "Minister of Justice" who has …

Are Prosecutors Born Or Made?, Abbe Smith

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In more than thirty years of criminal law practice--from public defender in Philadelphia to professor running a criminal law clinic in New York, Boston, and DC--the author has had countless encounters with prosecutors and countless conversations. Early in her career, the encounters and conversations were noteworthy--something to rail about back at the office, or to "dine out on" with friends. Soon enough they became commonplace, not even worthy of mention, just the way things were. But the author felt it important to pick a few examples and talk about them.

Contingent Rewards For Prosecutors?, Peter A. Joy, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

This column explores whether contingent reward plans for prosecutors are ethical. After weighing arguments in favor and against such plans, the column concludes that rewards for prosecutors contingent on trial convictions are unsound.

Changes To The Culture Of Adversarialness: Endorsing Candor, Cooperation And Civility In Relationships Between Prosecutors And Defense Counsel, Lissa Griffin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Following a brief history of prior versions of the relevant Standards in Part I, Part II describes the current draft of the proposed Prosecution and Defense Functions, focusing on new requirements for candor, civility, and cooperation. The article concludes that the proposed revisions represent a healthy step toward a more reliable, trustworthy, and efficient criminal justice system. The revisions explicitly recognize the central, powerful, and multidimensional role of the prosecutor and attempt to respond accurately and realistically to the needs and demands of that role. As the drafting and approval process continues, certain specific areas need greater clarification and thus …

Bad Faith Exception To Prosecutorial Immunity For Brady Violations, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Part I of this Article discusses Imbler’s adoption of absolute immunity for prosecutors. Part II discusses Imbler’s extension of absolute immunity to a prosecutor’s violation of his disclosure duty under Brady v. Maryland. Part III describes the ease with which prosecutors are able to evade the Brady rule and the difficulty of enforcing compliance with Brady. Part IV discusses the absence of any meaningful sanctions to deter and punish prosecutors for willful violations of Brady. Part V proposes a bad faith exception to absolute immunity of prosecutors for Brady violations.

“Hard Strikes And Foul Blows”: Berger V. United States 75 Years After, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

My essay examines one of the most iconic decision of the Supreme Court seventy five years later. Berger v. United States is the most eloquent and authoritative description of the prosecutor's duty "not that it shall win a case but that justice shall be done." My essay looks at why the Court decided to take up the case then, and why it has become so prominent in criminal law and ethics.

Sentence Reduction As A Remedy For Prosecutorial Misconduct, Sonja B. Starr

Articles

Current remedies for prosecutorial misconduct, such as reversal of conviction or dismissal of charges, are rarely granted by courts and thus do not deter prosecutors effectively. Further, such all-or-nothing remedial schemes are often problematic from corrective and expressive perspectives, especially when misconduct has not affected the trial verdict. When granted, these remedies produce windfalls to guilty defendants and provoke public resentment, undermining their expressive value in condemning misconduct. To avoid these windfalls, courts refuse to grant any remedy at all, either refusing to recognize violations or deeming them harmless. This often leaves significant non-conviction-related harms unremedied and egregious prosecutorial misconduct …

The Most Dangerous Power Of The Prosecutor, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This is the James D. Hopkins Memorial Lecture in honor of Judge Hopkins, who was the Dean of Pace Law School from 1982 to 1983 and earlier served with great distinction on the New York Appellate Division's Second Judicial Department. Judge Hopkins served on that court when I worked in the special prosecutor's office, and as head of the appeals bureau, I argued several cases in Judge Hopkins' court. One case stands out, the case of Salvatore Nigrone v. Murtagh. It was an extensive undercover investigation. My office used informants, wiretaps, and a sham arrest to expose corrupt attempts to …

Prosecutors And Corrupt Science, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Guilty Pleas, Brady Disclosure, And Wrongful Convictions, Kevin C. Mcmunigal

Faculty Publications

The purpose of this article is to explore a connection between prosecutorial failures to disclose Brady material and wrongful convictions in the context of guilty pleas, the primary procedural vehicle our criminal justice system uses for securing criminal convictions.

Litigating Brady V. Maryland: Games Prosecutors Play, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

By any measure, Brady v. Maryland has not lived up to its expectations. Brady's announcement of a constitutional duty on prosecutors to disclose exculpatory evidence to defendants embodies, more powerfully than any other constitutional rule, the core of the prosecutor's ethical duty to seek justice rather than victory. Nevertheless, prosecutors over the years have not accorded Brady the respect it deserves. Prosecutors have violated its principles so often that it stands more as a landmark to prosecutorial indifference and abuse than a hallmark of justice. Moreover, as interpreted by the judiciary, Brady actually invites prosecutors to bend, if not break, …

Pro Se Defendants And The Appointment Of Advisory Counsel, H. Patrick Furman

Publications

This article provides an overview of advisory counsel used to assist pro se criminal defendants, including the appointment and duties of advisory counsel, ethical obligations, and considerations for trial judges and prosecutors.

Prosecutorial Ethics And Victims' Rights: The Prosecutor's Duty Of Neutrality, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In recent years, enhanced legal protections for victims has caused victims to become increasingly involved in the criminal justice process, often working closely with prosecutors. In this Article, Professor Gershman analyzes the potential challenges to prosecutors' ethical duties that victims'participation may bring and suggests appropriate responses.

Witness Coaching By Prosecutors, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Given its controversial nature, one would expect the practice and ethics of witness coaching to have attracted close scrutiny by courts and commentators. Interestingly, however, the subject has received relatively modest attention. A handful of judicial and ethics opinions have discussed superficially the subject of witness preparation and coaching. Practitioner manuals typically offer general guidance on how to prepare witnesses, and occasionally address tactical and ethical issues involved in coaching. Scholarly commentary has examined the ethical limits of witness preparation, particularly by differentiating acceptable techniques from improper techniques, which promote false or misleading testimony. In addition, popular culture occasionally has …