I have a question for the community.
I'm a law student researching an ethical question of when a prosecutor decides to base an investigation solely on the testimony of witnesses granted immunity (obvious credibility/bias problems there).
I'm in Arizona and have found relevant ABA rules and Arizona Ethics rules, but have found no case law on the subject (specifically looking for a case where the Defendant appealed his conviction because the prosecution based the investigation solely on these witnesses' testimony, or a case where a prosecutor was held to have violated the rules of ethics for doing that).
This is not for a graded assignment (I'm not asking others to do my homework), this is merely for class discussion. I've done a lot of research but I'm just missing some case law I think!
I'm a law student researching an ethical question of when a prosecutor decides to base an investigation solely on the testimony of witnesses granted immunity (obvious credibility/bias problems there).
I'm in Arizona and have found relevant ABA rules and Arizona Ethics rules, but have found no case law on the subject (specifically looking for a case where the Defendant appealed his conviction because the prosecution based the investigation solely on these witnesses' testimony, or a case where a prosecutor was held to have violated the rules of ethics for doing that).
This is not for a graded assignment (I'm not asking others to do my homework), this is merely for class discussion. I've done a lot of research but I'm just missing some case law I think!