For some prosecutors, DWI cases may be their first assignment
following law school. In a 2002 study almost half (48 percent) of prosecutors
surveyed reported they were not provided with adequate training or preparation
before handling DWI cases in their jobs as prosecutors, and over one-third
(34 percent) of judges believe prosecutors do not have the same knowledge
or expertise about DWI as defense attorneys do (Robertson and Simpson 2002).
Coupled with inexperience and high turnover, prosecutors also face the additional
burden of inadequate staff and resources for the number of DWI cases they
are charged with handling.
In an attempt to provide more effective and efficient prosecution and
adjudication of drunk driving offenses, South Carolina utilizes federal
grant funding to provide special prosecutors for DWI offenses. Prosecutors
operate in seven selected counties in the state.
The South Carolina Commission on Prosecution Coordination also receives
grant funding to provide DWI prosecution training to law enforcement officers,
solicitors and summary court judges.
Jury trials — an option allowed in some jurisdictions — present special
prosecution challenges. Unlike other crimes, many jurors will admit to having
driven while intoxicated and may be inclined toward leniency for the drunk
driving offender on trial. This, combined with a talented defense attorney’s
arguments, can lead to jury identification with the offender (Robertson
and Simpson 2002).
Witness testimony is a vital part of the evidence in a jury trial. Police
officers need to be able to properly articulate their cases. Omissions or
insufficiently detailed testimony can lead to the dismissal of a case or
acquittal of the defendant. This is especially important since repeat offenders
are more likely to opt to go to trial.
In a 2001 study by Simpson and Robertson, police officers said their credibility
as witnesses was undermined by a lack of opportunity to prepare for cases,
a lack of experience testifying in general and the difficulty of providing
the court with the desired level of specificity upon cross-examination.
Officers’ testimony could be improved by training seminars run by officers
with experience testifying, mock trials for skill development and greater
testimony guidance by prosecutors. |
