Judicial Mistakes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2. FAILURE TO OBTAIN DEFENDANT’S PERSONAL WAIVER OF TRIAL RIGHTS WHEN DEFENDANT STIPULATES TO AN ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE (i.e. PRIOR CONVICTIONS). Defendant’s right to a jury trial includes the right to be tried on each and every element of the charged offense. In order to stipulate and waive trial on an element of the offense the defendant must personally waive his trial right either orally or in writing. State v. Bible, 2011 WL 691628, at 2 (Minn. App. Mar. 1, 2011) (unpublished opinion) (“The defendant must make the waiver personally on the record in open court either orally or in writing. It cannot be delegated to defendant’s counsel.”) See Judicial Training Update 11-15 (Judicial Mistake #1: When Defendants Stipulate To Element Of Offense); http://ebenchbk.law.umn.edu/index.php/defendant_stipulates_to_an_element 3. FAILURE TO OBTAIN DEFENDANT’S PERSONAL WAIVER OF RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL IN CASES WHERE DEFENDANT ELECTS TO HAVE A COURT TRIAL Defendant MUST personally waive the right to jury trial. The waiver must come from the defendant, not defense counsel. Strict compliance is required in order to assure that the waiver is voluntarily and intelligently made. State v. Sandmoen, 390 N.W.2d 419, 423 (Minn. App. 1986); Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.01, subd. 1(2)(a); Minn. R. Crim. P. 20.01, subd. 1(a). 4. GRANTING A MISTRIAL OVER OBJECTION OF THE DEFENDANT – MANIFEST INJUSTICE v. DOUBLE JEOPARDY If Defendant consents to a mistrial he waives any claim to double jeopardy. If Defendant objects to a mistrial then jeopardy remains attached unless “manifest injustice” requires the trial to be terminated. Manifest necessity is “an objective necessity apparent not only to the district court but to any reviewing court.” The Court should consider less extreme alternatives than a mistrial (i.e. fewer than 12 jurors, accepting a partial verdict, additional instructions, etc.). State v. Hunter, 815 N.W.2d 518 (Minn.App.2012). 5. FAILURE TO STOP IMPROPER PROSECUTORIAL FINAL ARGUMENT “Reducing the incidence of prosecutorial misconduct is a shared obligation and trial courts have a duty to intervene and caution the prosecutor, even in the absence of objection…..” State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294 (Minn. 2007); Judicial Training Update 10-14 (Prosecutorial Misconduct). http://ebenchbk.law.umn.edu/index.php/prosecutorial_misconduct Page 24 of 166
6. EXCESSIVE COURT INVOLVEMENT IN CRIMINAL PLEA NEGOTIATIONS The Court may not offer or promise the defendant an anticipated sentence that is not part of an existing agreement between the defendant and the prosecutor. Anytime the court improperly or excessively injects itself into plea negotiations the guilty plea is per se invalid. The district court’s proper role is one of “discreet inquiry into the propriety of the settlement submitted for judicial acceptance.” State v. Melde, A09-1050, Minn.Ct.App. Feb 22, 2010 (Reversed and remanded because the court promised defendant a prison sentence at the low end of the sentencing guidelines range.); Judicial Training Update 10-4 (District Court & Plea Negotiations: How Far Is Too Far). 7. PLEAS OF GUILTY: (1) FAILURE TO FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 15 GUILTY PLEA ADVISORY; (2) FAILURE TO ESTABLISH A SUFFICIENT FACTUAL BASIS TO SUPPORT THE PLEA OF GUILTY; (3) FAILURE TO FOLLOW CORRECT PROCEDURE FOR AN ‘ALFORD’ OR ‘NORGAARD’ PLEA OF GUILTY Minn. R. Crim. P. 15.01 (Guilty Plea advisory for felonies and gross misdemeanors); Rule 15.02 (Guilty Plea advisory for misdemeanors); Judicial Training Update 10-15 (Requirements for an Alford Plea of Guilty); Judicial Training Update 10-16 (Requirements for Norgaard Plea of Guilty); Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.01, subds. 3 and 4; State v. Theis, 742 N.W.2d 643 (Minn. 2007) (discussing the need for a proper factual basis); Page 25 of 166
Page 2 and 3: Page 2 of 166
Page 10 and 11: 4. Throughout the process, we encou
Page 18 and 19: This work is not meant to be a piec
Page 20 and 21: Fundamental Error is a legal term p
Page 22 and 23: for the Third Circuit found a funda
Page 26 and 27: http://ebenchbk.law.umn.edu/index.p
Page 28 and 29: 2009) (Waiver of right to counsel b
Page 30 and 31: 16. REFUSAL TO ALLOW DEFENDANT’S
Page 32 and 33: Matter of the Welfare of N.T.K. 619
Page 34 and 35: Some states make a distinction betw
Page 36 and 37: The concept of miscarriage of justi
Page 38 and 39: In cases where a large-scale audien
Page 40 and 41: Norway Norwegian police, courts, an
Page 42 and 43: in April 1999. All cases accepted b
Page 46 and 47: However, the specific term "actual
Page 48 and 49: convicted persons do not have a con
Page 52 and 53: Questions of Fact Arbitrary and Cap
Page 54 and 55: decision will be subject to clearly
Page 56 and 57: Strict Scrutiny If a statute imping
Page 58 and 59: permanent condition rendering judge
Page 60 and 61: Supreme Court Candidacy and Electio
Page 62 and 63: Another report stated that Hathaway
Page 64 and 65: The News cited expert speculation t
Page 66 and 67: Born near Princess Anne, Maryland,
Page 68 and 69: He remained in the Continental Cong
Page 70 and 71: Death Samuel Chase died of a heart
Page 74 and 75:
of law (a trial) would "dampen" the
Page 76 and 77:
Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consum
Page 78 and 79:
Notes _____________________________
Page 80 and 81:
Page 80 of 166
Page 82 and 83:
Page 82 of 166
Page 84 and 85:
Page 84 of 166
Page 86 and 87:
Page 86 of 166
Page 88 and 89:
Page 88 of 166
Page 90 and 91:
Page 90 of 166
Page 92 and 93:
Page 92 of 166
Page 94 and 95:
Page 94 of 166
Page 96 and 97:
Page 96 of 166
Page 98 and 99:
Page 98 of 166
Page 100 and 101:
Page 100 of 166
Page 102 and 103:
Page 102 of 166
Page 104 and 105:
Page 104 of 166
Page 106 and 107:
Page 106 of 166
Page 108 and 109:
Page 108 of 166
Page 110 and 111:
Page 110 of 166
Page 112 and 113:
Page 112 of 166
Page 114 and 115:
Page 114 of 166
Page 116 and 117:
Page 116 of 166
Page 118 and 119:
Page 118 of 166
Page 120 and 121:
Page 120 of 166
Page 122 and 123:
Page 122 of 166
Page 124 and 125:
Page 124 of 166
Page 126 and 127:
Page 126 of 166
Page 128 and 129:
Page 128 of 166
Page 130 and 131:
Page 130 of 166
Page 132 and 133:
Page 132 of 166
Page 134 and 135:
Page 134 of 166
Page 136 and 137:
Page 136 of 166
Page 138 and 139:
Page 138 of 166
Page 140 and 141:
Page 140 of 166
Page 142 and 143:
Advocacy Foundation Publishers The
Page 144 and 145:
XVI for Drug-Free Communities Landm
Page 146 and 147:
Vol. VIII 2022 ComeUnity ReEngineer
Page 148 and 149:
Vol. XV 2029 Inner-Cities Revitaliz
Page 150 and 151:
The e-Advocate Monthly Review 2018
Page 152 and 153:
2021 Biblically Responsible Investi
Page 154 and 155:
The e-Advocate Quarterly Special Ed
Page 156 and 157:
Legal Missions International Page 1
Page 158 and 159:
Vol. V 2019 XVII Russia Q-1 2019 XV
Page 160 and 161:
The e-Advocate Newsletter Genesis o
Page 162 and 163:
Extras The Nonprofit Advisors Group
Page 164 and 165:
About The Author John C (Jack) John
Page 166:
Page 166 of 166
show all

Judicial Mistakes

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?