Also known as:prosecuting attorneys · prosecutor · district attorney · DA
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A public official who represents the government in criminal prosecutions by presenting evidence and arguments to prove the defendant's guilt. The role includes complying with notice requirements before offering certain evidence and refraining from improper public statements that could prejudice the accused.
See Our Sources
How its tested
Common Examples
6
Rebuttal of Victim Trait Evidence
Perry Pratt is on trial for assault. His counsel introduces evidence that the alleged victim had a violent character. The prosecuting attorney responds by calling a witness to testify that the victim was known for nonviolence in the community. The court admits the rebuttal testimony under the applicable evidence rule.
Peacefulness Evidence in Homicide
Phuong Pham stands trial for murder after claiming the victim attacked first. The prosecuting attorney offers testimony from coworkers that the victim was consistently peaceful and avoided confrontations. The evidence is admitted to rebut the first-aggressor claim in the homicide prosecution.
Portia Price faces charges for theft. The prosecuting attorney seeks to introduce a prior final felony conviction against Price to prove an essential fact in the current case. The court admits the judgment because it meets the requirements for a conviction entered after trial or guilty plea.
Custodial Interrogation by Prosecutor
Pilar Pena is arrested and taken to a station house. A prosecuting attorney questions her in a closed room without giving any warnings about rights to silence or counsel. Her resulting statements are later challenged as inadmissible because the interrogation occurred while she was deprived of freedom in a significant way.
Miranda v. Arizona384 U.S. 436 (1966)
In March 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested at his home in Phoenix and taken to the police station where he was identified by the complaining witness. He was then questioned by two officers in Interrogation Room No. 2 for two hours. The officers did not advise him of any right to counsel. Miranda signed a typed confession that was introduced at his trial for kidnapping and rape.
On October 14 1960 Michael Vignera was arrested in connection with a Brooklyn robbery. He was taken first to the 17th Detective Squad headquarters in Manhattan and later to the 66th Detective Squad. A detective questioned him for several hours without any advice concerning counsel. Vignera made an oral admission. He was then questioned by an assistant district attorney whose transcribed statement was also introduced at his trial for first-degree robbery.
On March 20 1963 Carl Calvin Westover was arrested by Kansas City police as a suspect in two local robberies. Kansas City police interrogated Westover on the night of his arrest. The next day local officers interrogated him again throughout the morning. Westover was then turned over to FBI agents who questioned him for two to two-and-a-half hours about California robberies and obtained signed confessions. At the time the FBI agents began questioning Westover he had been in custody for over fourteen hours.
On January 31 1963 Roy Allen Stewart was arrested at his home in connection with a series of purse-snatch robberies. During the next five days police interrogated Stewart on nine different occasions without any advice of rights. On the ninth session Stewart confessed. Transcripts of the interrogations were introduced at his trial for kidnapping rape and murder.
The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed Miranda's conviction. The New York courts affirmed Vignera's conviction. The Ninth Circuit affirmed Westover's conviction. The California Supreme Court reversed Stewart's conviction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the four cases and consolidated them for argument.
Paige Porter, a prosecuting attorney, registers and enforces a foreign protection order in good faith. When the alleged violator sues for damages arising from the enforcement action, the court dismisses the claim because the statute grants immunity to the prosecuting attorney for acts performed in an official capacity.
Stambovsky v. Ackley572 N.Y.S.2d 672
Stambovsky, a resident of New York City, entered into a contract to purchase a house located in the Village of Nyack from defendant Ackley. Shortly after contracting, Stambovsky discovered to his horror that the house was widely reputed to be possessed by poltergeists. These apparitions had reportedly been seen by Ackley and members of her family on numerous occasions over the preceding nine years.
Ackley had actively publicized the presence of these spirits. She reported their existence in a national publication, Readers’ Digest, and in the local press in 1977 and 1982, respectively. As a result of these efforts, the house gained a reputation in the community as haunted. In 1989, the property was featured in a five-home walking tour of Nyack and was described in a November 27 newspaper article as a riverfront Victorian with a ghost.
Upon learning of this reputation, Stambovsky promptly commenced an action in the Supreme Court, New York County, seeking rescission of the contract of sale and recovery of his down payment. The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) on April 9, 1990. Stambovsky then appealed to the Appellate Division.
Priscilla Parks is charged after officers locate evidence through an improper interrogation. The prosecuting attorney argues that the same evidence would have been discovered through lawful means already underway. The court admits the evidence because the independent investigation would have inevitably uncovered it regardless of the violation.
Nix v. Williams (Williams II)467 U.S. 431 (1984)
On December 24, 1968, ten-year-old Pamela Powers disappeared from a YMCA building in Des Moines, Iowa, where she had accompanied her parents to watch an athletic contest.
Williams was seen leaving the YMCA carrying a large bundle wrapped in a blanket. A fourteen-year-old boy who helped open his car door reported seeing two skinny white legs inside it.
Williams' car was found the next day 160 miles east in Davenport, Iowa. Items of the child's clothing along with an army blanket were recovered at a rest stop on Interstate 80 near Grinnell between Des Moines and Davenport.
A warrant issued for Williams' arrest. On December 26 the Iowa Bureau of Criminal Investigation organized a search with two hundred volunteers divided into teams that began twenty-one miles east of Grinnell and moved westward through Poweshiek County into Jasper County. Searchers checked all roads, ditches, culverts, abandoned farm buildings, and other places where a small child's body could be hidden. The search area was marked off in grids on highway maps.
Williams surrendered to police in Davenport and was arraigned. After his attorneys arranged for no questioning during transport, two Des Moines detectives took him into custody for the return drive.
During the trip Detective Leaming spoke to Williams about predicted snow and the parents' right to a Christian burial. Williams then directed the officers to the child's shoes, the blanket, and ultimately the body itself.
The body lay next to a culvert in a ditch beside a gravel road in Polk County. It was roughly two and one-half miles from where one search team had stopped when the search was suspended at 3 p.m.
Williams was indicted for first-degree murder. At his first trial the evidence of the body was admitted over objection. He was convicted. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed. The United States Supreme Court reversed in Brewer v. Williams on the ground that the statements were obtained in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
At the second trial in 1977 the prosecution introduced evidence of the condition of the body, articles and photographs of clothing, and autopsy results without offering Williams' statements or showing that he had directed police to the body. The trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the body would have been discovered within a short time in essentially the same condition by the continuing search. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed.
On federal habeas corpus the District Court denied relief after an independent review. The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
What notice must a prosecuting attorney provide before offering evidence of a defendant's prior acts?
The prosecuting attorney must give reasonable notice of any such evidence the prosecutor intends to offer at trial so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it.
May a prosecuting attorney make public statements that heighten condemnation of the accused?
A prosecuting attorney must refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused except for statements necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
When is a prosecuting attorney immune from liability for enforcing a foreign protection order?
A prosecuting attorney is immune from civil and criminal liability for an act or omission arising out of the registration or enforcement of a foreign protection order if the act or omission was done in good faith in an effort to comply with the uniform act.
384 U.S. 436 (1966)
…in any significant way. In each of the four cases before us, the defendant was questioned by police officers, detectives, or a prosecuting attorney in a room in which he was cut off from the outside world. In none of these cases was the defendant given a full and effective warning of his rights at the outset of the interrogation…