The Defendant's Discovery Obligation in Utah State Courts
A defendant charged in a criminal case brought in the Utah State Courts has an obligation under Rule 16 of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure to disclose information and documents. Except as otherwise provided or as privileged, the defense is required to disclose to the prosecutor such information as required by statute relating to alibi or insanity and any other item of evidence which the court determines on good cause shown should be made available to the prosecutor in order for the prosecutor to adequately prepare his case.
Unless otherwise provided, the defense attorney shall make all disclosures at least ten days before trial or as soon as practicable. A defendant also has a continuing duty to make disclosure.
The Government's Discovery Obligation in Utah State Courts
The government's obligation to disclose information and documents to a defendant in a criminal case brought in the Utah State Courts is governed by Rule 16 of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure. Under Rule 16, a prosecutor is required disclose to the defense upon request the following material or information of which he has knowledge:
(1) relevant written or recorded statements of the defendant or codefendants;
(2) the criminal record of the defendant;
(3) physical evidence seized from the defendant or codefendant;
(4) evidence known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused, mitigate the guilt of the defendant, or mitigate the degree of the offense for reduced punishment; and
(5) any other item of evidence which the court determines on good cause shown should be made available to the defendant in order for the defendant to adequately prepare his defense.
Continue Reading Permalink 0 Comments
The Defendant's Discovery Obligations in Federal Criminal Cases
A defendant charged in a federal criminal case has a reciprocal obligation to disclose information and documents to the government. The defendant's obligation, like the government's obligation, is governed by Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Under Rule 16, a defendant's obligation is contingent upon the defendant or his or her counsel having made a discovery request to the government and the government having complied. In general, if a defendant makes a request for discovery under Rule 16 and the government complies, then the defendant must disclose documents and objects, the results of examinations or tests, and expert witnesses.
Continue Reading Permalink 0 Comments
The Government's Discovery Obligation in Federal Criminal Cases
The government's obligation to provide information and documents to a defendant in a federal criminal case is governed by Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. In general, upon a request made by a defendant or his or her counsel, the government is required to disclose statements of the defendant, the defendant's record, documents or objects, results of examinations or tests, and expert witnesses.
Continue Reading Permalink 0 Comments
Your Bill of Rights
The first ten Amendments to the United States Constitution comprise your Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights gives you protection against abuses of government power. Amendments IV, V, VI, and VIII are the Amendments, as interpeted by the United States Supreme Court, that protect you against abuses of police and prosecutorial power.
Continue Reading Permalink 0 Comments
What are the police allowed to do after they obtain a search warrant?
Once the police have a search warrant, they are entitled to enter the designated property to search for the items listed on the warrant. Legally, the search is supposed to be confined to the specific areas described in the warrant. For example, if the search warrant includes only the living room, the search should not extend into the kitchen, bathroom or bedroom. But there are exceptions to this limitation which are frequently used to justify broader searches. For example, the police may search beyond the terms of the warrant in order to:
- ensure their safety and the safety of others
- prevent the destruction of evidence
- discover more about possible evidence or contraband that is in plain view elsewhere on the property, or
- hunt for evidence or contraband that, as a result of their initial search, they believe exists in another location on the property.
When do the police need a warrant to make an arrest?
As long as the police have good reason (called "probable cause") to believe that a crime has been committed and that the person they want to arrest committed the crime, they can, with just one exception, make an arrest without asking a judge for a warrant.
The exception? There are few places where the adage "a man's home is his castle" still applies, and an arrest at home is one of them. The police must have a warrant to arrest a person at home if the arrest is for a nonserious offense -- such as a simple assault -- and there is no fear that the person they want to arrest will destroy evidence or cause harm to the public.
Copyright 2005 Nolo
Permalink 0 Comments
Will a judge dismiss my case if I was questioned without a Miranda warning?
No. Many people mistakenly believe that a case will be thrown out of court if the police fail to give Miranda warnings to the arrested person. What Miranda actually says is that a warning is necessary if the police interrogate a suspect and want to use any of her responses as evidence. If the police fail to give you a Miranda warning, nothing you say in response to the questioning can be used as evidence to convict you. In addition, under the "fruit of the poisonous tree" rule, if the police find evidence as a result of an interrogation that violates the Miranda rule, that evidence is also inadmissible at trial. For example, if you tell the police where a weapon is hidden and it turns out that you gave this information in response to improper questioning, the police will not be able to use the weapon as evidence unless the police can prove that they would have found the weapon without your statements.
Copyright 2005 Nolo
Permalink 0 Comments
What's a Bench Warrant?
Here's a mnemonic device to start you off: A "bench warrant" usually means someone didn't have their backside on the bench when they should have. That's the bench in front of the judge, not the one from which you feed the park pigeons.
Speaking more technically, a bench warrant is issued by a judge when a defendant violates the rules of the court. Most often, the defendant has simply failed to show up. Once a bench warrant is issued, however, the police can treat it like any other arrest warrant -- and use it to bring the defendant back in front of the judge.
Continue Reading Permalink 0 Comments