Criminal Procedure Law (United States)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Criminal designated in the United States , the method of determination and conviction of criminal acts . Due to the highly federal form of government, there are significant procedural differences both between the states and between the federal government and the states in general.

Legal sources

US criminal procedural law is not codified. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure exist at the federal level . However, the fundamentals of the procedure often result directly from constitutional law . Are of particular importance

Preliminary investigation

The criminal process takes place in two sections: preliminary procedures and trial. The main process is divided into a cognizance process and a punishment process. The preliminary investigation is carried out by the public prosecutor's office and the assigned police to determine whether a crime was committed at all, who committed it and what evidence is available to prove the culprit's guilt.

Search and Seizure (search and arrest)

The 4th amendment is intended to protect the population from arbitrary arrest. The seizure (~ arrest) means in US law the control of a government agent over a person or thing. It is only permitted if the police have sufficient suspicion (probable cause) . The yardstick for this is the reasonably prudent person. The seizure is possible both preventively and repressively, i. H. the suspect may have already committed a crime or is about to commit a crime.

The police can stop people below the threshold of arrest for a very short time. According to a decision by the Supreme Court , this is known as a terry stop. This requires a reasonable suspicion . This is weaker than the probable cause of the arrest. Reasonable suspicion is, in turn, required to stop a motor vehicle. The mere sniffing by a police dog does not count as a search. If the dog strikes, this is considered a probable cause for further measures ( Florida v. Harris , 568 US 237 (2013)). The inner motive of the police officer is irrelevant for the legality of the measure (also so-called pretextual stops ), as long as it was legal in itself ( Whren v. United States , 517 US 806 (1996)).

Indictment

After the preliminary investigation, the public prosecutor's office can file charges in two different ways, depending on the offense . In most cases, the indictment is made directly by the public prosecutor through a Bill of Information or a similar document. However, the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that serious criminal cases at the federal level be indicted by the grand jury . This condition also exists in some states.

Voire dire and trial (main procedure)

After the indictment is filed, the jury must be selected because all defendants in the United States have a right to a jury under the Sixth Amendment . The accused also has the option of waiving this right so that the hearing only takes place before a judge. The jury is selected jointly by the public prosecutor and the accused (or his legal counsel ).

The burden of proof as in most other jurisdictions is, too, to the prosecutor. It must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. The negotiation takes place in several stages. First, the prosecutor presents its side by filing incriminating evidence and summoning witnesses . According to the public prosecutor's office, the defense has the option of submitting an application to the judge to discontinue the proceedings in the absence of sufficient evidence, or to present their side and hear exonerating witnesses . Witnesses can always be cross-examined by the opposing side . However, by virtue of the 5th Amendment, the accused has an unlimited right to refuse to testify . If the accused does not make use of this right, for example to appear as an exonerating witness on his own behalf, he must also answer the questions of the public prosecutor.

After both parties have presented their evidence, both make their final plea , with the defendant always having the last word. In a trial with a jury, the jury now leaves the courtroom and secretly deliberates on the guilt or innocence of the accused. The jury's decision must be unanimous and will be announced by a member of the jury after the deliberations have ended in the courtroom and in the presence of both parties.

If the accused is found guilty, the punishment process follows. This usually happens at a later date and often under a different judge. In cases that may result in the death penalty , the US Supreme Court ruled that the jury must also be involved in that process. As in the criminal investigation proceedings, the public prosecutor's office must present evidence of why a certain sentence is appropriate. Here too, the defendant has the opportunity to bring evidence and summon witnesses in order to reduce the sentence.

After the punishment procedure, the judgment is provisionally final. However, the accused has the opportunity to appeal and contest the judgment. The process is not reopened, but only checked whether the rights of the accused and other applicable law were observed during the hearing. The appellate court can then, depending on the circumstances, confirm the judgment in full or order a completely new trial, a repetition of the punishment proceedings or the acquittal of the accused. If a defendant is acquitted in the first instance, the public prosecutor cannot appeal, so the judgment is final in this case. This is also the case if the defense's request to discontinue the proceedings is granted after the commencement of the criminal proceedings due to lack of evidence.

Plea bargaining

The procedures described here are only used in exceptional cases. The American legal system, like the German one, is overwhelmed by the large number of cases. Plea Bargains are used in the United States to provide relief . They correspond to a “negotiation” of the sentence and guilt of the accused. In exchange for a confession, the public prosecutor suggests a lesser punishment than is foreseeable in the court proceedings. If the accused accepts the proposal, he pleads guilty before the judge. This then determines the sentence, which is usually identical to the proposal of the public prosecutor. However, the judge also has the option to refuse the trade and order due process.

In insignificant cases, this method makes it possible to significantly reduce the workload of the courts. It also offers the accused the option of a lesser punishment. In this sense, plea bargaining is also substantially comparable to simplified criminal proceedings , which generally serve to speed up judicial proceedings. However, plea bargaining is used significantly more often and is also permitted for serious crimes.

Differences to the German criminal process

This article or the following section is not adequately provided with supporting documents ( e.g. individual evidence ). Information without sufficient evidence could be removed soon. Please help Wikipedia by researching the information and including good evidence.

Although many elements of the American criminal process can also be found in the German variant (e.g. burden of proof in favor of the accused), there are also significant differences:

  • The American judicial process is clearly adversarial. This means that both the prosecution and the defense themselves are responsible for providing all relevant evidence. The role of the judge is mainly that of the "arbitrator", who is supposed to guarantee correct compliance with the applicable procedural law. The judge also decides, for example, whether evidence can even be admitted to the hearing, for example if it has been obtained illegally.
  • The questioning of witnesses by the judge is not provided for in American procedural law. Thus, if no jury is convened, the jury or the judge will rely on the arguments of both parties to determine guilt or innocence. This is a clear difference to German procedural law, in which the court is required to investigate the facts as completely as possible and also to be extensively involved in the hearing afterwards.
  • In the American criminal process, there is a strict separation between trial and punishment procedures. This has emerged from the condition of the jury trial and is not necessary in trials that only take place under one judge.
  • The use of juries to determine guilt or innocence has not been provided in Germany since 1924. Since in the USA twelve “ordinary people” have to be convinced of the guilt of the accused in such proceedings, the atmosphere in American courtrooms differs significantly. This is reinforced by the general approval of the media, including television and photographers.
  • Appeal to an acquittal by the prosecutor is generally inadmissible under American law. Likewise, the public prosecutor's office cannot appeal due to “insufficient punishment”. This law is understood as protecting the citizen from state coercion.
  • In American legal practice, a legally valid confession always leads to the end of the trial for judgment and directly to the punishment process. This is particularly important for “plea bargaining”.
  • see also Finding of fact

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Opinionjournal.com
  2. ↑ See the death penalty in the United States. ( Memento from February 15, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Roberts in the left-wing counterpunch on his supposed change of heart.