Explain why a grand jury is used rather than the prosecutor simply issuing a criminal charge?

Answer

Explain why a grand jury is used rather than the prosecutor simply issuing a criminal charge?

            A grand jury is often used because it not only uses prosecutor’s bill of charges, but also involves many members in making a decision on whether to indict a defendant. Worth noting, is that prosecutors are have a lot of judgment to make within a short period, which includes filing charges within 3 days. This means that prosecutors are required to make a haste decision in relation to which offenses they will pursue even though other charges may come later following additional investigation. Such a situation means indicates the need for a grand jury, which secretly reviews the case including calling witnesses to testify against a suspect in suspect’s or his lawyer absence (Greene County, 2015). Yet, indicted suspects may later get transcripts of the grand jury proceedings, which is one of the key reasons prosecutors keep the evidence to the bare minimum. Nevertheless, the grand jury is used because it functions as a test trial thus enabling prosecutors to evaluate the manner in which the evidence is going to be received by jurors. In essence, a prosecutor tries to convince the grand jurors that a charge has enough foundation to sustain a trial. The prosecutor does this through presenting the evidence she or he has.

Based on the evidence presented by the prosecutor and the finding of probable cause that a crime was committed, discuss the purpose of a grand jury issuing a true bill (criminal charge) or not.

            A grand jury plays the role of a test trial in which the evidence presented by a prosecutor is tested. This includes calling witnesses before jurors to listen their view on the matter. This is crucial because the evidence presented before jurors is tested as the listen to it and make a decision on whether it establishes probable cause, which is used to determine an individual committed the crime as claimed by the prosecutor. In essence, the grand jurors listen and determine if the charges claimed by the prosecutor are enough to indict an individual. Worth noting, is that grand jurors have the capacity to investigate either as far as bringing charges is concerned (Barkan & Bryjak, 2011). This evidences that a grand jury looks into different avenues when testing prosecutor’s evidence. Altogether, the test trial ultimately leads to voting in which grand jurors may return a true bill or otherwise. Yet, a return of no bill from the jurors may not be final judgment as a prosecutor may look for more evidence to lead to indictment.

Discuss whether or not a defense attorney and/or the defendant can address a grand jury and provide reasoning for why a defense attorney and/or the defendant would choose to attend or not attend the grand jury proceeding.

            A defense attorney possesses no right to speak or argue on behalf of a client before grand jury. In fact, it is common practice to find that defense attorneys are absent from grand juries altogether as presentation is by far and large controlled through a district attorney. The feeling among defense attorneys is that they will have their opinions tamed by a district attorney, which to them makes no telling influence on grand jury proceedings. After all, the district attorney dictates what is presented to the grand jury. A defendant, however, has a right to address a grand jury by testifying on his behalf as well as offering witnesses - the jurors may subsequently vote on whether hearing from defense witnesses is necessary. Worth noting, is that defendants rarely choose to address grand juries because of the fact that their attorneys do not conduct the questioning as well as the lack of a judge to rule on protest s. Though there are instances in which defendants testify before jurors, it is widely considered a risky affair that may make or break the case.

Provide all the procedural and substantive ways that a prosecutor and a defense attorney can resolve a case before it goes to a grand jury.

            One of the widely employed substantive way prosecutors and defense attorneys may resolve a case prior going before a grand jury involves the pretrial conference. At this phase of the case, the judge seeks to work with the defense and the prosecution to settle on its status as well as attempt to resolve it. For instance, defendants enter a guilty plea in which sentences occasionally happen during pretrial conferences. Throughout this stage, the defense and prosecution team are asked to take into account the circumstances under which a crime happened including why it happened as well as who did what. This ensures that the teams are reminded of the need to resolve sticking issues and ensure that the case does not proceed to grand jury phase. The prosecution, for instance, may enter a guilty plea to avert further trauma, a victim preferring to end a case, and other factors supporting such an action (Diamond, 2014). As well, a judge may postpone the case to a different pretrial conference when additional work by the defense or prosecution all in attempt to resolve it prior it is taken to a grand jury.  

Explain all the procedural and substantive dispositions of a case between a prosecutor and a defense attorney before it goes to a trial.

            Subject to relevant reference’s term, judges may enter pretrial orders even without judicial approval when required to regulate proceedings, and if not dispositive of defense or claims of a party. Worth noting, is that prosecutors ought to avert delays in case disposition (Neubauer & Fradella, 2013). As well, they should oversee that they act with diligence and promptness whilst prosecuting an accused individual. Nevertheless, a judge’s order need to be in writing and any of the two parties may file a motion in which the moving party’s reasons are stated. Judge’s ruling may be general unless one of them appropriately requests facts as well as conclusions of law. Objection may be done at this stage and often specificity is required. In sum, the criminal justice system is designed to oversee fairness on the defense and prosecutor’s part. Both parties are safeguarded under the law and a case may be resolved even prior going before a grand jury. In most cases, cases may be resolved during the pretrial conference as the prosecution and defense team are offered the opportunity to iron out sticking issue (s). Indeed, a judge may set another pretrial conference to ensure that a case does not proceed before a grand jury. The goal is to ensure that cases are resolved swiftly and justice prevails.