One of the most significant aspects of the American legal system is the wide discretion that American prosecutors have in criminal matters. For example, a federal prosecutor may decline to prosecute an offense because he or she finds it not significant enough to merit prosecution in federal court. For instance, the quantity of drugs involved or the loss to a victim may be relatively small. The investigating agents may then present their evidence to a state prosecutor (assuming the offense is one that may be prosecuted in state court), where, again, the state prosecutor has discretion to prosecute the offense or to decline prosecution. Similarly, the federal prosecutor may decline prosecution of a minor offense if he or she considers that there is an acceptable alternative to prosecution, such as an agreement by the defendant to compensate the victim of the offense.
Defendants charged with minor, non-violent crimes may be eligible for pre-trial diversion into a program that usually includes making restitution to the victim. If the defendant completes the program successfully, he or she will not be prosecuted and may avoid a criminal record.
Another instance in which a prosecutor may decline to bring charges or ask the grand jury to return an indictment is where, although there is enough evidence to obtain a persons arrest, (that is, probable cause), the prosecutor knows that enough additional evidence to convict the person at trial will be unavailable. In such circumstances, the prosecutor is not obligated to seek an arrest warrant. In fact, if a prosecutor did bring charges or obtain a grand jury indictment and have a defendant arrested under those circumstances, this could be viewed as an abuse of the prosecutor’s discretion.
source quoted from here
No comments:
Post a Comment