The Codefendant Demurrer at its most basic
by: Ryan • March 4, 2014 • no comments
(Created page with "Here's what you need to know about the co-defendant demurrer. Prior to 1983, prosecutors were prohibited from charging co-defendants on the same indictment if the co-defendan...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Here's what you need to know about the co-defendant demurrer. Prior to 1983, prosecutors were prohibited from charging co-defendants on the same indictment if the co-defendants were charged with different crimes. The legislature was explicitly concerned about fairness to defendants. In 1983, a law was passed that allowed prosecutors to do just that, but simultaneously | + | Here's what you need to know about the co-defendant demurrer. Prior to 1983, prosecutors were prohibited from charging co-defendants on the same indictment if the co-defendants were charged with different crimes. The legislature was explicitly concerned about fairness to defendants. In 1983, a law was passed that allowed prosecutors to do just that, but it simultaneously gave defendants the right to ask for separate trials. Just a few years later, that law was repealed, and while a new statute took its place, depriving the defendants of the guarantee of separate trials if requested, the language authorizing the joint indictment of co-defendants, when the charges aren't the same, wasn't included. |
Now, normally, when the status quo is X, and a law passes converting X into Y, and then the law is repealed, don't we go back to X? And if so, isn't it unlawful for codefendants to be jointly indicted if the charges don't match? | Now, normally, when the status quo is X, and a law passes converting X into Y, and then the law is repealed, don't we go back to X? And if so, isn't it unlawful for codefendants to be jointly indicted if the charges don't match? | ||
Revision as of 21:32, March 5, 2014
Here's what you need to know about the co-defendant demurrer. Prior to 1983, prosecutors were prohibited from charging co-defendants on the same indictment if the co-defendants were charged with different crimes. The legislature was explicitly concerned about fairness to defendants. In 1983, a law was passed that allowed prosecutors to do just that, but it simultaneously gave defendants the right to ask for separate trials. Just a few years later, that law was repealed, and while a new statute took its place, depriving the defendants of the guarantee of separate trials if requested, the language authorizing the joint indictment of co-defendants, when the charges aren't the same, wasn't included.
Now, normally, when the status quo is X, and a law passes converting X into Y, and then the law is repealed, don't we go back to X? And if so, isn't it unlawful for codefendants to be jointly indicted if the charges don't match?
There are other arguments that can be raised in support of dismissing such an indictment. And if you want to see the latest demurrer (substantially developed since the December 2013 OCDLA conference), just e-mail me.
Fortune favors the bold.
