Prosecutorial Misconduct

Today in the United States of America many individuals have been falsely convicted of charges with the prosecutors performing prosecutorial misconduct. Many individual lives have been ceased due to the long sentencings of being falsely accused of convictions. The chief officials over these cases should have rules and regulations as to how prosecutorial cases are dealt with, set a standards to show the misconduct and to relief the defendant, and to emphasize on ways to prevent future incidents of prosecutorial misconduct. The first step of dealing with prosecutorial misconduct is the fact that “each state bar has a mechanism in place for the discipline of misconduct by attorneys licensed in that state. Separately, federal courts may discipline

For other types of prosecutorial misconduct, courts determine whether a due process violation occurred by first applying separately developed standards, and then by applying outcome-determinative analysis as a harmless error test. There is no reason, however, why due process should be defined differently depending on the particular type of prosecutorial misconduct involved. The two approaches are inconsistent with one another and focus on different societal

Instead, due process should be defined according to rules developed with reference to traditional notions of fair play and standards of professional conduct for prosecutors; outcome-determinative analysis should then be applied to prosecutorial misconduct as a harmless error test.” Due process is great way to rule case whether defendants need to be trial or punished for a particular crime. The situation would limit the action of prosecutorial misconduct because the system would have admissible information to conduct a fair trial. This type of decision is based on the due process of the cases but it does not deal with the issue because many attorneys temper with evidences, bias toward individuals or the situation of the case and still yet perform misconduct. The warrants or relief should be based upon heavily on the defendant’s interaction in the crime whether he or she was heavily invaded, accessory, prior criminal statues, and the height of the situation. Many alternatives of punishment could be presented to the defendant limit the sentencing time, set probation at an ultimate high the community service hours increased. Although those are alternatives but there need to be a fair play and justice as Fisher