Discussion 9-12

Chapter 9 question 2 A suggestive lineup is considered a violation of due process because it does not conform to the reliability and minimal suggestion prerequisites. In order to ensure that these preconditions have been attained, factors such as the witness’ opportunity to view the perpetrator during the criminal incident, the witness’ attentiveness during the crime, the degree of accuracy when describing the criminal prior to confrontation, the certainty demonstrated by the witness during confrontation with the suspect, and the duration between the criminal incident and confrontation between the witness and the criminal have to be critically evaluated. This minimizes the chances of ending up with a procedure that will guarantee the identification of a specific suspect in a lineup (Joycelyn and John).
Chapter 10 question 1
A probable cause hearing is in my opinion a crucial element in determining whether the requirements for probable cause have been attained in situations whereby a suspect has been arrested by an officer of the law, without an official warrant for the suspect’s arrest. I believe that this process is necessary in order to protect individuals from being arrested without sufficient evidence to suggest their involvement in criminal activities or arrests based purely on bad faith.
Chapter 11 question 3
Strictly speaking, vindictive prosecution arises when charges levied on an individual are motivated by vengeance. This situation is considered a violation of the Due Process Clause as outlined in the Fourteenth Amendment. The defense can overcome vindictive prosecution by pointing out the lack of sufficient evidence to incriminate the defendant, the unfair selection of members of the grand jury, variance during trial, and the prosecutor’s misconduct as an advisor to the grand jury.
Work cited
Joycelyn, Pollock W, and John, Klotter C. Criminal Law. 9. Taylor & Francis, 2012. Print.