Calhoun-2012-spring-CrimProedureII-answer

Calhoun-2012-spring-CrimProedureII-answer - ID CrimPr02_LS...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–10. Sign up to view the full content.

Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 2
Image of page 3

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 4
Image of page 5

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 6
Image of page 7

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 8
Image of page 9

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 10
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ID: CrimPr02_LS l_Calhoun_Final_2 O l 2 SL Calhoun ID: (Exam Number) Exam Name: CrimPr02_LS1_Calhoun_Final_20125L Instructor: Calhoun Grade: Page 1 of 1 Exam taken with Sofl'esl V2796 Essay A Pitchess Discovery. The first issue is to detemrine whether the Defendant's Pitchess motion should be granted to allow for Pitchess discovery. In Brady, the Court upheld a motion to discover a law enforcement officer's personnel record, if there was any relevant information of excessive force. ethnic of racial bias, falsifying evidence, or planting evidence. Such holding was later put into statute under, California Evidence Code Section 1043 and 1045. Section 1043, states that a pitchess motion, includes: (1) Identification ofthe parties, including the officer and government agency; (2) Description of the records and information to be discovered; And (3) An affidavit by the Defendant, including statements as to the materiality of such information and a reasonable belief that such information is within the government agency's possession. Section 1045, states that {‘1 Court will determine whether the information must be relevant to the subject matter of "II the pending litigation. Furthermore, there will be no disclosure of offenses more than 5 years old or remote. Any request for discvoery regardin a government's agency policy or pattern of conduct may be obtained from another source. There is no unencessary Page 6 of 13 {Question 1 continued} ID: CrimPro2_LSl_Calhoun_Final__2012$L Calhoun annoyance. embarrassment. or oppression. Finally, any discovery shall not be used for any purpose other a court proceeding. The Court has held that discovery should not be shared with the Prosecution (Preventing the Prosecution from becoming Brady vessels) or other defense attorneys. In the present case, the Defendant (D) must demonstrate that his request for information regarding Officer Jone‘s (J) perrsonell file is material and therefore, is relevant to the pending litigaticns. D must demonstrate. at the very least a defense. Generally, a self-defense claim is used in assault and battery cases. D will most likely make a self—defense claim in his upcoming trial because he is accused of assaulting J h and such assault can only be justified with self~defense. Therefore, if Dcan show that J‘s actions leading to the assault threatened D's well-being, then D may claim that he [fig X, only assaulted J because he felt threated. So, having any information that J is likely to assault others would be material to his self-defense claim. Therefore, complaints of excessive force by other arresstees. government agencies, or citizens would help D show that he was acting in self-defense. Therefore. the court should allow discovery of any complaints as to the use of exceeive force by J. (1) All accusations of excessive force by J for the past ten years. The Court is not allowed to make discovery of complaints made more than five years ago under Section 1043. Since D has asked for all accusations of excessive force by for the past ten years. then the Court must not allow such request. Outdated Page7of 13 { Question 1 continued) ID: CrimPr02_LS 1_Calh0un_Fina l__2 0 12 SL Calhounil accusations may be more prejudicial than helpful in the present case. Even if J hadflfiqm accusations of excessive force dating back ten years ago, he may have been I rehabilitated since then and therefore, such evidence is not a true measure of J‘s tendencies to use excessive force. Furthermore. such request will be very burdensome on the San Francisco Police Department, who is most likely the government agnecy the request has been directed. The SFPD would have to look through numbers of pages of records just to find an mention of excessive force by J. It would be very detrimental, since there is no indication that J even has such accusations against him. Furthermore, the request would be an unecessary annoyance, embarrasment, or oppression on J and the SFPD. Therefore, the Defendant's request for all accusations of excessive force by J for the past ten years should be denied under Section 1043. D should amend his motion to include accusations of excessive force by J for the past five years. (2) The names and addresses of all witnesses making such complaints. If D's Pitchess motion is properly amended to include only accusations of excessive force by J for the past five years, then names and addresses of all witnesses making such complaints should be discovered. However, such discovery would be limited to the records or information within the possession of the SFPD. Therefore, the Court should make discovery of any names and addresses of all witnesses making such complaints. Page 8 of 13 (Question 1 continued) ID: CrimPr02_LS l_Ca1houn_Final_2 0 1281. Calhoun (3) All statements of witnesses given at any hearings on such complaints. Discovery of all statements of witness given at any hearings on such complaints may be too burdensome on the SF PD, especially if they may not have such information in their possession or confidential. Providing the staements would prove too much work for the SFPD and therefore, the names and addresses of such witneses should be sufficient. The SFPD may not have such statements and would have to seek other resources to get it. The SF PD may not have such resources in time, money, or staff to make such findings. Also, the such statements may be confidential. Such information may embarrass the witnesses, since any case of excessive force would be a sensitive subject. Usually, statements made in such claims are the work product of the SFPD. Unless, they were made in Court and on public record, then they may be used. However. the SFPD would not the source for such discovery. With the names and addresses, the Defendant may seek out such statements. Therefore, all statements of witnesses given at any hearings on such complaints should not be discovered as it would burdensome to the SFPD. Pitchess discovery before the preliminary hearing. Under California case law. a Defendant may make a Pitchess motion before the preliminary hearing. However. the Court will use a balancing test in order to make such discovery available, including such factors: (1) Objective of the Defendant; And (2) Undue delay. Page 9 of 13 {Question 1 continued) ID: CrimPro2_LS1_CalhounHFinal_2Ol2SL Calhoun in the prensent case. the Defendant has made a request for Pitchess discovery seven days before the preliminary hearing. Therefore. the SFPD would have only eight days to gather such records and information. Here, the Defendant's objective is to show that there is no probable cause of the assualt charge becuase there is no finding that the Defendant did not act in self-defense. However, such objective is not sufficient because the Defendant may show that there is no probable cause for assault through other means. including witnesses and the Defendant's statements. Furthermore, a tendency to use excessive force may not help in a hearing requiring only probable casue to bind the Defendant over. Also. such discovery would be burdensome on the SFPD becuase they would need to find such assucations in only eight days. Finally, there would be undue delay because the SFPD may not be able to make such findings with eight days, in which time D may request another waiver. However, a preliminary hearing is supposed to happen quickly after the crimes are charged. Adela-y in the time to determine whether there is even accusations out there would not be a sufficient use / 'f” Therefore. the court should not order the Pitchesskdiscovery befgé/ the preliminary .\ ,/ hearing. , -' of the Court's time. Essay 8 Withdrawl of plea Page 10 of 13 (Question 1 continued) ID: ; CrimPr02_LS 1_Calhoun_Fina1_2 0 12 SL Calhoun A guilty plea must be made voluntary and therefore. would be intelligently and knowing. Voluntary means that the Defendant is aware of the direct consequences of his guilty plea, unless such plea was induced by threats, misrepresentation, and improper promises. Furthermore. the Defendant must know of the direct consequences of his guiltuy plea. which include: (1) The trure nature of the charges; (2) Details of the plea negotiations; (3) Minimum and maximum sentences; (4) Parole and probation eligibility; (5) Boykinfl' all rights; And (6) (Maybe) Immigration consequeunces. A Defendant may withdraw his/her plea in appeal. habeaus corpus, sentencing of a new crime, or withint the same trial court (Motion to withdraw plea). In the present case. the Defendant attempted to withdraw his plea because he didn't know the true nature of the charges. However, the Court has held that the defense counsel does not have to explain all elements of the charges to the Defendant, unless such element is important. In that sense, articulation is not required. Furthermore. the Court may assume that the defense counsel described to the Defendant the elements of the charges as part of his/her duties as counsel. Therefore. as long as the record indicates that the Defendant was informed of direct consequences of the guilty plea. then there can be no withdraw] of such plea. The record indicates that the Defendant knew the true natures of the charges because the Judge asked him, "if he knew what he was pleading to" and the Defendant answered. "yes, I did. Therefore. the record demonstrates that the Defendant knew the elements of the charges and therefore, the true nature of charges. Furthermore, the record indicates that the Defendent knew his Boykin/T all rights. which include: (1) The Page 11 of 13 , ' (Question 1 continue/ii!” I" K x) ID: CrimPro2_LSl_Calh§flIiLi 2 * Wlhoun .-// W undrial' And ( ) he right to confront hislher accusers. Again, articulation is not required for the BoykinfTalI right . 137/ Here, the Defendant was asked by the judge, if he understood he was giving u% M right to have a trial and the Defendant said yes. Therefore. the Judge was given clear W privilege against self-incriminatiogfiéi The right go a indication that the Defendant knew the true nature of the charges and that he was giving up his right to have a trial. In regards to the immigration consequenes, if the immigration law is not straightforward (As it usuall is), then the defense counsel should explain to hisi‘her client that there may be adverse immigration consequences in a guilty plea. The defense cousnei does not have to do anything more. Here, the defense cousnel advised the Defendant that a conviction for armed robbery might have immigration consequces. Yet. the Defendant still pleady guilty. Since the Defendant pleaded gpilyreven when the plea/\\ _ . . . x y informed that there may be Immigration consequethjs/he may fl based on no understading of_.-his ' 'ibigfi/tion WNW/i0 625i MW MA. U” W W rig/v AM) gtl Williams. Apprndi. Blakely, and Booker. In Williams. the Court held that the Judge has broad discretion to sentence the Defednant. ln Apprendi, the Court held that. other than a fact of a prior conviction. any fact that increases the Defendant's sentence beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to the jury and found beyond a reaonble doubt. In Blakeley. the Court held that Washington Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines were a violation of the Page12cif13 ( Question 1 continued) ID: CrimProzfiLS 1_Ca lhoun_Final__2 O 12SL Calhoun 6th Amendment right to a jury trial and the holding of Apprendi. The Court stated that the maximum sentence is the maximum sentence the Judge may impose without making any additional findtins (Only elements ofthe crime and not aggravating circumstances). The Court upheld Apprendi and cosequently. signed the death warrant of the Federal Sentencing Guidleines. Finally, in Booker, the Court court held that the Federal Sentencing Guidlines were a violation of the 6th Amendment right to a jury trial and the holding of Apprendi. However. they remeided the situation by make such guidlines merely advisory and mandatory. In the present case. the maximum sentence for assault is ten years. The judge may sentence up to the ten years. and did so, because he did not make any additiional findings to put the sentence beyond the ten year maximum. Furthermore, the judge may add 2 years for the prior conviction for the 2006 aggravated assault because Apprendi has not been extended to prior convictions. However, the judge may not add the additional 2 years because the amount stolenwas in excess of $5, 000. Here, we have an additional fact that should have been/submitted to a jury and proved by them l M ======== End of Answer #1 ======== 5/ beyond a reaonble doubt. Page 13of13 {/ ID: CrimPr02_LS1_Calhoun_Final_20lZSL 7 Calhoun END OF EXAM ——_—_.———————_ Page 1 of O ...
View Full Document

  • Fall '
  • Kibel

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern