Introduction
Criminal justice procedure ensures that the rights of suspected criminals are not violated against. Different rules and regulations have been formulated in different jurisdictions to regulate the process of arresting and convicting criminals. It is therefore the duty of law enforcers to ensure that they conduct this process accordingly to promote human rights.
Treatment of Eye Witness Evidence
Eyewitness evidence, though technically reliable, often lead to a considerable number of wrongful convictions especially in America. It is therefore important for the law enforcers to adhere to the right procedure when obtaining the evidence from the eye witnesses (Anonymous, N. d). When interviewing the witnesses, law enforcers should ask open ended questions to widen the scope in which the witness can tell the story from his own point of view and in his own words and should refrain from asking suggestive questions that may prompt the witness to distort information (Anonymous, N. d). Investigators should also aim at building rapport with the witnesses as this will encourage the witness to give greater amounts of accurate information (Anonymous, N.d).
In cases where the witness is required to identify suspects, the investigator should compile the mug book with great objectivity and ensure it contains every required detail that will make it easier for the witness to identify the suspect (Anonymous, N.d). The methods applied in identification of suspects by witnesses especially on line up can adversely determine reliability, fairness, and objectivity of the process and therefore should be handled carefully and investigators should strictly warn the witnesses against providing false information that often leads to wrongful convictions.
The Right to Counsel Assistance
Criminal procedure is characterized by complexities. Consequently, the law identifies various levels of investigation and adjudication in which the accused can seek assistance of a counsel (Bacigal, 2008). The sixth amendment of the United States constitution creates the provision for right to hire defense counsel by the accused since it is a fundamental right within the meaning of the fourteenth amendment’s due process clause (Bacigal, 2008).
Violation of this right often results in the reversal of the conviction. However, the right to hire counsel is limited to those with adequate assets to pay the expenses to the service. If the accused lacks the finances to hire or retain a counsel, he is declared indigent and he may be provided with counsel by the government which then becomes a civil liability (Bacigal, 2008).
The right to counsel representation attaches at the start of adversary judicial proceedings (Bacigal, 2008). At this point, the government has adequate basis to prosecute the defendant therefore exposing the defendant to constant confrontations with the prosecution. The right to counsel is applicable in cases where the accused is facing criminal charges and is facing possible sentence of incarceration (Bacigal, 2008). This is applicable in both felonies and misdemeanors whereby the possibility of incarceration prompts the need to hire expert legal practitioner to assist the accused in his defense. On the other hand, misdemeanor cases do not require the accused to hire counsel if before trial the court informs that no confinement will be imposed (Bacigal, 2008).
The right to counsel is also upheld in pretrial proceedings that form critical stages of the criminal justice system. In these cases, absence of counsel to represent the defendant may prejudice the accused (Bacigal, 2008) Right to counsel at other pretrial proceedings is a function of the occurrence of proceedings after the adversarial judicial process begins. However, the adversary judicial proceedings has not been clearly defined but the U.S supreme court defines it as commencement by way of formal charging of the accused, conducting preliminary hearings, indictment and arraignment in court (Bacigal, 2008).
Waiver of this right must be made voluntarily and intelligently though most jurisdictions require the defendant to execute the waiver in written form (Bacigal, 2008). The sixth amendment of the constitution further prohibits representation by a third party who is a non attorney despite his relationship with the accused.
Right to Self Representation
When a defendant voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly waives the right to counsel the procedure is that he should be allowed to proceed. The defendant should however be fully informed on the dangers and the drawbacks associated with self representation. On making the choice of self representation, the accused must adhere to all the rules of procedural and substantive law (Bacigal, 2008). The right to self representation by the accused is not absolute and if he indulges in disruptive behaviour in the course of the proceedings he may be denied the right to continue under this status and a stand by counsel may be instructed to complete the trial (Hall, 2008).
Trial judges are given the mandate to appoint these standby counsels who attend the trial process and are available to take over the defense upon requirement by the court (Hall, 2008). The standby counsels also serves to direct the defendant through basic procedures thereby relieving the judge from the responsibility of explaining and enforcing basic rules expected of the defendant in the courtroom as well as assisting him with overcoming routine procedural obstacles (Bacigal, 2008)
Role of Attorneys in Criminal Justice
On appointment, the counsel must continually represent their client unless he is replaced by another attorney. If the defendant has a good cause he may request attorneys relieve. However, the mere fact of being displeased by the attorney does not provide grounds for the court to provide another counsel. The right to counsel is deemed effective if the defendant is provided with effective counsel. What constitutes a good council is an issue that raises a lot of debate but generally rests within good sense and discretion.
Effective counsel representation is characterized by the opportunity for the defendant to consult his attorney before and during trial discretionary.(Bacigal, 2008) In effective representation may occur if an attorney has conflict of interest and representing one client may consequently lead to prejudice of another (Harr, 2007). However, mere dissatisfaction from the outcome of a case does not form sufficient grounds for claims of in effective representation.
There exists a false misconception that counsel appointed by government on behalf of those financially incapable are less effective relative to privately hired attorneys or the higher the legal fee the better the legal representation (Harr, 2007) However, for the defendant to successfully claim ineffective assistance of counsel, he must prove that the counsels performance was deficient and that deficient performance prejudiced defense (Bacigal, 2009).
In conclusion, it is evident that the law aims at protecting the citizens’ rights. It is therefore the role of the citizens to learn and understand their rights and ensure that they are not violated against.
Reference List
Anonymous (Not dated) Eyewitness Evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Web.
Bacigal, J.R (2008): Criminal law and procedure; an overview. N.Y: Cengage learning publishers Inc.
Hall, E.D (2008): Criminal law and procedure. N.Y: Cengage learning publishers Inc.
Harr, S. J. & Hess, M.K (2007): Constitutional law and the criminal justice system. N.Y: Cengage learning Inc publishers.