Abstract

This Essay offers an unconventional approach to deterring prosecutorial misconduct. Trial judges should use their inherent authority to forbid prosecutors from appearing and handling cases in their courtrooms until the prosecutors have completed training on Brady v. Maryland, Batson v. Kentucky, and other types of prosecutorial misconduct. If a single trial judge in a medium-sized or large jurisdiction imposes training prerequisites on prosecutors, it could set off a race to the top that encourages other judges to adopt similar (or perhaps even more rigorous) training requirements. A mandate that prosecutors receive ethics training before handling any cases is comparable to the enhanced training requirements that some state legislatures impose on indigent defense lawyers. This Essay argues that trial judges arguably have the inherent authority to impose a training requirement on prosecutors to ensure the orderly administration of justice.

Document Type

Article

Publication Information

89 Fordham Law Review 1179-1196 (2021)

Comments

This Essay was prepared for the Colloquium entitled The Judicial Role in Professional Regulation, hosted by the Fordham Law Review and the Stein Center for Law and Ethics on October 9, 2020, at Fordham University School of Law.

Share

COinS