Adam M. Gershowitz
William & Mary Law School
September 9, 2008
This Article explores the unfortunately large number of instances in which appellate courts reverse convictions for serious prosecutorial misconduct but do not identify the names of the prosecutors who committed the misconduct. Because judges are reluctant to publicly shame prosecutors whose cases are reversed, this Article advocates that a neutral set of third parties undertake the responsibility of publicly identifying prosecutors who commit serious misconduct. The naming of prosecutors will shame bad actors, provide a valuable pedagogical lesson for junior prosecutors, and signal to trial judges that certain prosecutors must be monitored more closely to avoid future misconduct.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 49
Keywords: prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutor, shaming, exculpatory evidence, peremptory challenges, death penaltyworking papers series
Date posted: September 11, 2008
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.407 seconds