"Project of the American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Standards Committee, Criminal Justice Section"--T.p. verso.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

This book is composed of two case studies. Each case study evaluates the performance of the attorney serving as the public defender in Duchesne County, Utah in 2007 and 2008. The case studies demonstrate that there are major flaws in the performance of the public defender with respect to very basic areas of expertise that would be expected of any competent public defender. A defendant should expect to have the public defender engage in (a) the effective cross examination of prosecution witnesses on relevant points ,as opposed to concentrating on completely irrelevant issues, (b) calling expert witnesses in order to impeach the veracity and credibility of prosecution witnesses, (c) placing the defendant on the stand so that his/her testimony would serve as a counterweight to the testimony of the prosecution witness(s), and (d) pointing out obvious false testimony made by prosecution witnesses, such as the claim made in case study one made by a certain prosecution witness that she was the mother of the defendant when her age was 37 and the defendants age was 34. It is mathematically impossible for this to be the case. Yet the Duchesne County prosecutor, a Mr. Charles, specifically refers to this person as being the mother of the defendant when examining a county sheriff, who likewise refers to this individual as the mother of the defendant. Such gross incompetence violates the constitutional rights of the defendant to adequate, competent representation.

A Discussion paper from the BJS-Princeton Project.

What happens when public prosecutors, the most powerful officials in the criminal justice system, seek convictions instead of justice? Why are cases involving well-to-do victims often prosecuted more vigorously than those involving poor victims? Why do wealthy defendants frequently enjoy more lenient plea bargains than the disadvantaged? In this eye-opening work, Angela J. Davis shines a much-needed light on the power of American prosecutors, revealing how the day-to-day practice of even the most well-intentioned prosecutors can result in unequal treatment of defendants and victims. Ranging from mandatory minimum sentencing laws that enhance prosecutorial control over the outcome of cases, to the increasing politicization of the office, Davis uses powerful stories of individuals caught in the system to demonstrate how the perfectly legal exercise of prosecutorial discretion can result in gross inequities in criminal justice. For the paperback edition, Davis provides a new Afterword which covers such recent incidents of prosecutorial abuse as the Jena Six case, the Duke lacrosse case, the Department of Justice firings, and more.