CASE SCREENING / PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION

Question 1

prosecutorial discretion: 3 outcomes

Answer 1

1) discretion not to charge someone 2) discretion to charge someone (requires probable cause) or 3) selective prosecution (discriminatory effect/purpose–see US v. Armstrong)

Question 2

selective prosecution (US v. Armstrong)

Answer 2

selective prosecution has discriminatory effect (similarly situated group of individuals not prosecuted) + discriminatory purpose

under US v. Armstrong, to show selective prosectuion, individual must show that prosecutorial policy had both a discriminatory purpose & a discriminatory effect (must show prosecutors did not charge similarly situated people of different race, for ex.)

Question 3

prosecutorial vindictivenss (Blackledge)

Answer 3

appearance of vindictiveness generally established if prosecuter reindicts Δ & increases severity of charge after Δ exercises statutory or constitutional right)

to prove vindictiveness = trial - guilty verdict - appeal - Δ wins appeals - 2nd trial = greater charge

Question 4

judicial screening (2 options)

Answer 4

preliminary hearing & probable cause hearing (could both apply if Δ not in custody)

Question 5

grand jury screening rule (exculpatory evidence)

Answer 5

federal courts do not have supervisory power to require prosecutors to present exculpatory evidence to grand jury

Question 6

grand jury investigative function

Answer 6

5th Amendment privilege extends not only to answers that would support conviction under federal criminal statutes but also to those answers which would furnish a link in chain of evidence needed to prosecute claimant for federal crimes