Denver criminal defense lawyer / getting charged

A lot of times by the time a person brings his case to a Denver criminal defense lawyer he is already the defendant in the case. That means he has already been charged with a crime. However, the process of actually charging the case is also important. Interestingly, it can vary pretty strongly from crime to crime and from state to state. One thing that is always required is that the prosecutor have at least a probable cause basis for believing the defendant committed the charged crime.

One thing that is universally not true is defendants do not have a federal right to be indicted by a grand jury. There is a right to be indicted in the United States Constitution. However, it is one of just a few rights that has not been "incorporated." That means it has not been held to apply to the states. So the states are largely free to decide how they want to charge cases.

Another national guide are the ethical burdens of prosecutors. The ABA model rules of ethical conduct for lawyers have specific rules that apply to prosecutors. One of those is that prosecutors are not ethically allowed to charge someone with a crime if there is no probable cause basis to believe the person did it. This is in stark contrast to the rules for defense attorneys. Denver criminal defense lawyers can raise defenses even if they believe there is little chance of succeeding. That's because prosecutors are "agents of justice" while defense attorneys are to be zealous advocates for their clients.

In Colorado, for more minor crimes, there may be no charging process at all. In fact, for most DUIs, the police report is the charging document. The police officer puts in the statutes you violated. The computer generates a charging document. The charging document is given to you or mailed to you. To satisfy the ethical obligation, the prosecutor simply drops the case if it is no longer supported by probable cause.

For other crimes, a document called an "information" may be used. This is prepared by the prosecutor after reviewing the police report and any other relevant information in the case. It tells the defendant what statutes he violated, what acts violated those statutes, when those acts happened and where. It gives most of the information necessary to at least know what happened.

In cases where there is an indictment, the process is much different. In those cases, a grand jury is convened. This is not like a trial. The prosecutor basically "runs" the grand jury. He presents evidence, can get witness testimony, and at the end can ask the grand jury to issue an indictment. Because the grand jury is not there to protect the defendant's rights, the defendant cannot really "do anything" about the grand jury. The defendant may benefit from the grand jury indirectly, though, if witness testimony ends of being favorable to the case at trial. He may be able to get transcripts from the grand jury session and introduce those into evidence.

A final note on grand juries (particularly those in federal court) is that they are not always used to prosecute cases. Sometimes a U.S. Attorney is not even seeking an indictment. Grand juries have very strong powers to get documents and compel testimony. So it is possible the justice department is really using the grand jury to perform an investigation. That investigation may support a criminal charge later on. It may also not support any criminal charges ever. So if you see a grand jury in the news, don't always assume that people who are asked to testify are involved in some high profile criminal activity.