Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Selective Prosecution Defense
In many recent high-profile white-collar criminal cases, a wide array of defendants (frequently allies of Donald Trump but also some well-known Democrats among them) have pursued a selective prosecution claim. These defendants typically argue they have been singled out while others who were engaged in virtually the same conduct have somehow escaped the government's wrath. It is not a defense to the merits of the criminal charge itself, but instead an effort to turn the focus on the prosecution and its motivations. The claim is almost always doomed to defeat in court. This article explores the law on selective prosecution and why, despite the long odds against success, it may still make sense from a defense perspective to assert the claim.
The Legal Standard
The common conception of selective prosecution bears almost no resemblance to the actual legal standard which is grounded in the guarantees afforded by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Mere selectivity in prosecution creates no constitutional problem, as the government is under no obligation to prosecute all possible defendants in a case. Indeed, at least with respect to white-collar crime, federal prosecutors are generally encouraged (given their limited resources) to achieve deterrence by bringing a handful of high-impact cases in lieu of arresting every offender. Similarly the government does not run afoul of selective prosecution principles when, for example, it dusts off an obscure provision of the criminal code to charge a defendant simply because that law has rarely if ever been used against others before (although that may raise separate constitutional issues as to fair notice).
This premium content is locked for Business Crimes Bulletin subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.