I. The arrestA. The cop busts you, he finds the drugs; you’re arrestedB. Arrest based on probable cause; their own (the cops) initiativeC. Or they will arrest you on a warrant (authorization to arrest someone issued by a judge)1. Most warrants are not being actively perused by the cops2. Example – skipping bailD. Booking1. Taking the persons background info2. Finger prints3. Check for outstanding warrants4. Usually take the mug shotE. After you are arrested, they can only hold you for 48-72 hours without charging you or informing you with the charges against youF. Initial appearance1. Informed with the charges2. Brought before a judge3. Bail is set; bail is not punishment; how much money do we need from this person to guarantee they will show up to the court date- Cash bond – person puts up a certain percentage of the money up front; get most of the money back when you go to trial; if you skip town, you don’t get themoney back- Preventive detention – denied bail; they are too much of a flight risk, the charges are too serious, we can’t trust him to show up to trial - ROR – Releases on your own recognizance; we will let you go based on your word, no money- Bail bondsmen – will supply you with the money for bail4. The charges against you can be changed5. In most cases, most of the money is returned if you show up to court.I. Preliminary hearingA. First chance for the accused to see the evidence against himB. Judges look at the evidence and determines if it is enough to hold a trial against him; to pursue the prosecutionC. Everything is entered into the recordD. Prosecutors sometimes don’t like preliminary hearings; eyewitnesses are problematic, they are recorded initially but by the time of the trial, they don’t remember everything, weakening the prosecutors caseII. Grand juryA. 15-20 people depending on the state. The prosecution issues an int – a description of what the prosecutor believes he did, defendants criminal behaviorB. Show all evidence to a grand juryC. They decide whether to go on with the indictmentD. They are usually very biased towards the prosecutors; they are only getting one side of the storyE. They are supposed to protect people from prosecutorial overreach, they are protecting the people from being bullied by prosecutorsF. They hear the evidence and issue a true bill or no bill- True bill – accept the indictment- No bill – deny the indictmentIII. ArraignmentA. Defendant is brought into court and charged with a specific crimeB. The indictment is read to you; you are accused of x, y, z and you did it on these days at this timeC. This is when you enter your plea1. Guilty – yes I did it, no trial, nothing left to bargain with, judge determine sentence2. Not guilty – almost always use this plea, allows you to hold onto your bargaining chip, no matter how guilty you are. This is when you can get a plea bargain3. Nolo contendre/plea – you are saying, “I am not going to fight the charges against me but I’m not going to say I’m guilty.” - They accept the charges but it does not open them up to civil liability.- Advantage: provides you a shield in a civil lawsuit. If you plead guilty, the surviving family can sue you. If you plead nolo, they have to go through all the facts again in court to determine guilt.4. Guilt is not determined by facts, it is determined by lawF. pre-trial 1. pre-trial motionsa. suppress- defense attorney says they want certain evidence to be excludedfrom the trial (one example)b. change of venue- defense says they don’t think they can get a fair trial by the jurors in this district – move the trial to a different venue so the defendant has a chance of being acquitted - try to set it up so its most advantageous for himc. severance - 2 defendants – say they want separate trials from each other- might do this so one defendant can sell out the other – take a plea bargain and taking the accomplice down d. discovery - go to judge – I want to see these police records/data/etc/everything the prosecutors have - force the prosecutor to give them evidence; does not have to be exculpatory; just regular evidence I. trialA. overview1. prosecution goes first2. the purpose is to present the factsa. no neutral fact finder – jury has to hear two biased accounts and figureout which one is true B. steps (opening, prosecution case, prosecution rests, direct verdict)1. opening statementsa. telling a story – each frame the facts in a particular way to benefit them b. no real evidencec. says that all of the pieces – once put together – will look like this…2. states evidencea. the prosecutors present evidence – only evidence that shows that the defendant is guiltyb. can be physical, documentary, paper, eyewitness testimony, etc. c. defense is trying to mess up the prosecutions game/storyd. evidence has to have certain standards – probative value- often weighed against whether it is prejudicial (evidence that may or may not be relevant; ex: on trial for murder- mention that he cheated on his wife)3. objectionsa. I dont want this evidence entered/this evidence should not be allowed b. evidence presented to jury – objections presented to judgec. something illegal or unlawful about this evidence – determined by judgesd. why you would object:- psychological reason (mess up the prosecutors game)- reversible error (judge makes mistakes – at an appeal – can object at the appeal if you did not object the evidence in the original trial – outcome of trial could have been differente. type of objections- heresy (witnesses can only testify to things that they saw or heard; heresy is secondhand testimony; ex: saying that I heard that sam said.. if they wanted to know what sam said they would have asked him to come in; testifying what someone else told them)- prosecution is leading the witness (when you ask a question andthe answer is buried in the question).exception: friendly witness and hostile witnesses (someone on your side- defense witness is friendly witness to defense attorney; can ask leading questions to hostile witnesses, not to friendly witness).can request friendly witness to switch to hostile witness- badgering the witness (ask the same questions several different time; can get them to screw up and say a different answer; can beaccused of perjury or unreliable witness)- speculation (asking the person to testify to more than they know)- scope of cross- ambiguous (ask a question that does not have