MinnLawyer Blog

We know instinctively that a simple mistake is different from misconduct. A child who spills milk doesn’t get a punishment, but one who lights the cat’s tail on fire does. What about when it’s a prosecutor in a criminal case making those mistakes or engaging in misbehavior?  In other words, when is the state only being human?

The Court of Appeals last week grappled with the distinction between prosecutorial misconduct  and prosecutorial error in State v. Leutschaft. (Minnesota Lawyer has a story on it in this week’s issue, password required.) Regardless of whether it’s error or misconduct, the defendant is going to get a new trial if he or she was deprived of a fair trial — and that’s as it should be. But the word “misconduct” itself carries a social stigma with it that should only placed on a prosecutor whose behavior rises to a certain level, such as committing an ethical violation, and not to one who, as the court says,  makes a “misstep of a type all trial lawyers make from time to time.”   

Of course defense attorneys also make mistakes and engage in misconduct on occassion. Recently the legal community has been transfixed by the charges against Roseville attorney Charles Ramsay, who allegedly sniffed cocaine in a restroom of the Winona courthouse during a break in a criminal trial. Ramsay is well known for his DUI defense work, including being a vigorous proponent of the “source code defense” for drunk-driving prosecutions involving Intoxilyzer results.  Ramsay’s client ultimately pleaded guilty to a terroristic threats charge. If the charges hold up, few would argue that what Ramsay did was misconduct. Presumably his client would have a pretty good ineffective assistance of counsel claim if he wants to undo his plea for some reason.