A month ago The Denver Post uncovered evidence of a concerning practice within the Denver City Attorney’s Office, thankfully we’ve learned the troubling wording that supported it has been changed.
We are encouraged that Denver city prosecutors have rewritten their policy on careless driving charges to instruct attorneys to “give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant” when making a plea offer.
That’s a vast improvement from what in an internal memorandum suggesting that, during plea offers, prosecutors should “ignore” a careless driving charge if there isn’t the evidence to support it, but “not to dismiss it until (defendant) pleads or the trial date.”
The wording might seem like a small technicality, but here’s why the distinction is so important.
The charge of careless driving adds a heightened offense to many traffic violations. It carries four-points on a record and is considered a strike that can add up to lost or suspended licenses. Such a prospect can intimidate a defendant who wishes to challenge their charges on a lesser offense, say running a red light or a crash. Facing such a heightened charge on a ticket encourages defendants to not only accept a plea deal, but even to plead no contest to the charges.
If a prosecutor refuses to drop that charge, the results can have serious ramifications.
The city attorney’s explanation for having the original language in the memo actually highlights a bigger problem with the criminal justice system in general.
Oftentimes a prosecutor won’t know going into an initial hearing or even a subsequent hearing whether there is evidence to support a careless driving charge. Police officer’s don’t note on the ticket why careless driving was included and prosecutors often are unable to speak to the officer before the trial. The result means that, until a person arrives at court, the prosecutor doesn’t know whether he or she will have the evidence to convict.
That is a problem.
Prosecutors ought to know if there is enough evidence to convict earlier in the process so defendants can make decisions based on the charges they will face in a hearing, or are facing as they consider plea offers. It’s a due process issue. We also imagine it’s a serious resource issue both on the side of the attorney’s office and in law enforcement.
Quibbling over careless driving charges may seem small, but it’s these kind of charges that disproportionately impact everyday men and women. Wealthy clients who can afford attorneys or can pay a ticket without a second thought aren’t stressed by drawn-out and trumped-up charges. It’s the hourly employee scrimping by who must take time off of work to attend court and challenge the charge.
And if that’s the mindset of prosecutors for lower-level offenses, how are drunk driving defendants treated? Or reckless driving or even defendants facing trespassing or disturbing the peace? These charges can upend lives and if there isn’t the evidence for a conviction. Our justice system rightly demands they be dropped and not unjustly carried over a defendant’s head to exact a harsher plea.
The new policy is a big improvement and we certainly hope we see it in practice.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
