U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Reviewing the Unreviewable Judge: Federal Prosecution Appeals of Mid-Trial Evidentiary Rulings

NCJ Number
123356
Journal
Yale Law Journal Volume: 99 Issue: 4 Dated: (January 1990) Pages: 905-924
Author(s)
S J Shapiro
Date Published
1990
Length
20 pages
Annotation
After examining the problem of the unreviewability of mid-trial judicial evidence rulings adverse to the prosecution in Federal courts, this note proposes a means to address the problem.
Abstract
Under present Federal statutes, the prosecution may only seek review from evidentiary rulings made before jeopardy has attached; consequently, any evidentiary ruling adverse to the prosecution made after the trial has begun is not appealable as an interlocutory ruling. The evidentiary matter can only be appealed after the verdict; however, since the prosecution would only appeal if the defendant is acquitted, appeal is precluded by the double jeopardy clause. The courts have addressed this problem in a number of ways. One circuit court has provided guidelines that specify which evidentiary issues must be decided before trial begins and which may be deferred. At least two district courts have developed a procedural device that converts unappealable mid-trial rulings into appealable pretrial ones through the grant of a mistrial. This note proposes that the problem be addressed by converting unappealable mid-trial suppression orders into appealable pretrial ones. 88 footnotes.

Downloads

No download available

Availability