Fri. Jul 12th, 2024

VINDICTIVE AND SELECTIVE PROSECUTION

WHAT IS VINDICTIVE PROSECUTION?

Vindictive prosecution is when a prosecutor violates a defendant’s due process rights and if they are using their decision to prosecute the defendant for purposes of retaliation.

The following instances constitute vindictiveness:

  • Where the prosecutor charges the defendant with a more serious offense after the defendant appeals the conviction of the lesser offense
  • Where the prosecutor charges the defendant with an offense although the defendant has not violated the law.

The following represent instances that DO NOT constitute vindictiveness:

  • Adding a charge after the defendant withdraws from a plea bargain agreement
  • Indicting the defendant on a more serious charge after the defendant rejected a plea agreement
  • Indicting the defendant on a new charge after a mistrial occurred
  • Indicting the defendant on a more serious charge after discovering that there was an error in the original information or indictment.

PRESUMPTION OF VINDICTIVENESS

If the presumption of vindictiveness arises, the presumption may be rebutted by showing that a legitimate and objective reason supported the change in the indictment or the basis for the indictment itself. However, if no presumption of vindictiveness arises, the defendant may show that the prosecutor was actually vindictive in her prosecution. The defendant may present direct evidence showing that the prosecutor was vindictive.

WHAT IS SELECTIVE PROSECUTION?

Selective prosecution is when the prosecutor bases her decision of whether to prosecute on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity. If they do this then the prosecutor may be guilty of selective prosecution.

A claim of selective prosecution must be raised in a timely manner before the trial has commenced otherwise the claim may be regarded as untimely and waived. In order for the defendant to prevail on a selective prosecution claim they must overcome the strong presumption that prosecutors have properly performed their duties. A selective prosecution claim is typically analyzed in accordance with the equal protection standards.

The defendant must produce evidence that shows:

  • The prosecutor engaged in selective prosecution
  • The selective prosecution had a discriminatory effect upon the defendant
  • The selective prosecution was pursued with discriminatory intent.

If you need help with this subject contact the legal team of Underwood & Associates with the link below https://www.yourcriminaldefenseattorney.com/blog/2020/october/vindictive-and-selective-prosecution/

 

 


Read MORE Below – click the links


We also have the First Amendment Encyclopedia  very comprehensive and encompassing

CURRENT TEST = We also have the TheBrandenburg testfor incitement to violence

We also have the The Incitement to Imminent Lawless Action Test

We also have the True Threats TestVirginia v. Black is most comprehensive Supreme Court definition

We also have the Miller v. California – 3 Prong Obscenity Test (Miller Test) – 1st Amendment 1st

We also have the Obscenity and Pornography ; 1st Amendment

We also have the Watts v. United StatesTrue Threat Test1st Amendment

We also have the Clear and Present Danger Test

We also have the Gravity of the Evil Test

We also have the Miller v. California – 3 Prong Obscenity Test (Miller Test) – 1st Amendment 1st

We also have the Freedom of the Press – Flyers, Newspaper, Leaflets, Peaceful Assembly – 1st Amendment lots of SCOTUS Rulings 

We also have the Insulting letters to politician’s home are constitutionally protected, unless they are ‘true threats’ lots of SCOTUS Rulings 

We also have the Introducing TEXT & EMAIL Digital Evidence in California Courts lots of SCOTUS Rulings 


9.3 Section 1983 Claim Against Defendant in Individual Capacity Elements and Burden of Proof – click here to learn requirements

the CODE ABOVE PROTECTS all US CITIZENS

the code BELOW PROTECTS ALL CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS

California Civil Code Section 52.1 Interference by threat, intimidation or coercion with exercise or enjoyment of individual rights


Recoverable Damages Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 LEARN MORE

New Supreme Court Ruling makes it easier to sue police

42 U.S. Code § 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights

18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law

18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights

Suing for Misconduct – Know More of Your Rights

Police Misconduct in California – How to Bring a Lawsuit

Recoverable Damages Under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983

Section 1983 Lawsuit – How to Bring a Civil Rights Claim


 Police Discretion

The police violated my rights

DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW

How to File a complaint of Police Misconduct?

Suing for Misconduct – Know More of Your Rights

New Supreme Court Ruling makes it easier to sue police

Prosecutorial Misconduct, What is it?

Frivolous, Meritless or Malicious Prosecution

Malicious Prosecution / Prosecutorial Misconduct

Prosecutorial Misconduct

 Vindictive Prosecution – Georgetown University

 VINDICTIVE AND SELECTIVE PROSECUTION

 Misconduct by Judges & Prosecutor

CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT LAW

Equality Act 2010 – Discrimination and mental health

Motion to reconsider – Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008 Section 1008

Fighting A Judgment Without Filing An Appeal Settlement Or Mediation – Options to Appealing

Right to Truth – Victims’ Bill of Rights – Prop 8 1982

118.1 PC – Police Officers Filing False Reports