Crimes in the United States
Each state can decide what laws they will have in their
state and what the penalties will be for each of the criminal acts. Murder is
one of the most serious mala in se crimes and as such there are many safeguards
provided for the defendant during the criminal process. The pecuniary loss
associated with first degree murder cases is the ultimate in that is the loss
of one’s life. In a first degree murder trial, where the state is seeking the
death penalty, the defendant is entitled to a 12 person jury. If the defendant
is convicted they are afforded the opportunity for the jury to decide their
fate as far as the death penalty is concerned. There is actually a bifurcation
of the process where the first part is the trial and if the defendant is
convicted then the second part is where the jury hears evidence and decides as
to whether the facts and issues presented via the evidence and testimony warrants
the person to be given the death penalty as a sentence.
The normal progression for a capital case to take, in this
process are in many respects, similar to other cases and even to other murder
cases. There is the investigative part of the case which is conducted by a law
enforcement agency. Once there is enough evidence for the police to make an
arrest they would either arrest on probable cause or they would, and in a good
amount of murder cases, apply for an arrest warrant. Once the person is
arrested they would usually have a very high bond or no bond set until they go
to a first appearance where the judge would determine if there was sufficient
probable cause to hold the defendant and then decide if there should be bond.
If there is no bond or a very high bond, the defense can motion the court for an
Arthur Hearing where they would put on evidence and try to persuade the judge
to set a bond. If a very high bond was set, the defense could file a motion for
a bond reduction. The judge would take into consideration all of the existing
facts presented by law enforcement regarding the type of crime, the manner in
which it was committed, and other relevant information pertaining to the
defendant.
In addition to the first appearance, there would be an
arraignment where the person would be officially charged and make a statement
as to whether they are pleading not guilty, nolo contendere or guilty. Once the
person pleads not guilty the process continues. Sometimes the defense will ask
for a preliminary hearing which will again have the judge decide whether
probable cause exists to charge the defendant with the crimes alleged in the
arrest affidavit. If there is sufficient evidence and the prosecutor assesses
the case to have met the elements of the crime they will take the case and
present it to a grand jury. I have prosecuted a case where I charged second
degree murder and once the toxicology reports came back from the lab, I had
enough to change the charges. I took the case to the grand jury and there was a
true bill for first degree murder handed down on both defendants in less than 5
minutes. The facts and circumstances did not warrant the death penalty so there
was no filing of the intention to seek the death penalty in that particular
case.
Between the grand jury and the trial there are motions
filed, hearings conducted in various issues pertaining to the admission of
evidence, depositions taken, and then the vior dire of the potential jurors, is
accomplished ending in the selection of 12 jurors to try and decide the case
and there can be either one to two alternates that sit through the entire trial
until the jury is ready to deliberate. This is done in case something happens
to a juror so there is someone to seamlessly step into that jurors place. It is
not uncommon to ask the judge to have one or two alternate jurors in cases to
ensure that if something happens rather than having mistrial due to not having
enough jurors to conduct deliberations, there is an available party on hand. In a death penalty case jurors have to be death qualified
which means they are asked questions about their ability to consider both
aggravating and mitigating evidence and then be able to render death sentence
in a case when it is appropriate. During the sentencing phase the jurors will
hear evidence presented by the prosecution as to why the jury should approve
the death penalty and from the defense who will present evidence as to why the
jury should not impose the death penalty on the defendant. In a non-death
penalty case, subsequent to a conviction, the prosecutor and defense attorney
would present evidence in the form of testimony and other items that they wish
the judge to consider when they are fashioning the sentence for the defendant.
There are many aspects that must be considered when
examining the second phase of this complex process. In the majority of criminal
cases the jurors are told not to consider what sanctions the defendant could be
facing and that the sentence should have no effect on their decision making
process. In a first degree murder case where the state is seeking the death
penalty, the jury is completely involved in this process and this can take a
toll on jurors since they are now holding the persons life in their hands. In
reality, they hold the defendant’s life in their hands when they are deciding
guilty or not guilty in a criminal case; however, they do not have anything to
do with the sentencing or penalty phase and usually do not find out the outcome
unless they are there for it or read about it in the paper. This intimate
involvement with the decision to take someone’s life places a very heavy strain
and burden on these jurors during this decision making process.
It is not unusual for a jury to be deadlocked and not be
able to make a decision regarding the regular part of a trial where they are
not even considering the penalty. When a jury is asked to go through the first
part of the trial and convict someone on a murder charge and then they are
asked to decide a person’s fate, and one of those options is death, a result of
a hung jury is not so unusual. Some of the key factors are either mitigating
circumstances or aggravating circumstances that would be argued to the jury by
both the defense and prosecution during this particular phase. It could be the
way in which the defendant killed the victim, if there was torture involved, if
they were lying in wait and ambushed them, or if the victim had done horrible
things to the defendant and precipitated the attack in some manner. In many
states these are outlined in the statutes as applied to the conviction charge
received. The jury will hear the things that the attorneys want to present to
them. Throughout the case, the prosecution is constantly assessing and
evaluating various evidence to determine whether or not the presentation of
this evidence to the jury, will assist the jury in being able to decide to
impose the death penalty on a defendant. This phase is unique to a death
penalty case. During this phase, and the one the jury in the Arias trial went through,
the jurors are presented with evidence, and also recollect back on evidence
they heard during the trial, and are charged with making a decision that can
result in the death of another human being by the jury recommending the death sentence
be imposed on the defendant. In the state of Colorado
