Hypothetical legal question

[DrFaroohk]

K - you're arrested and charged with murder. Cops are pretty sure you did it. BUT - you didn't do it.

However, there's still a shit ton of evidence against you, so your lawyer works out a deal where you plead guilty and only get like 10 years, instead of life...

...but then, you find out that this shit ton of evidence was all made up in an attempt to make you feel helpless and go for the deal.

Is that legal? grounds for appeal? Major lawsuit?

Yes I like hypothetical legal questions for fun.

[Andara Bledin]

Yes. If you can prove that the other side used unlawful means against you, it is grounds for a possible re-trial based on the previous being a mis-trial, even if you bargained down.

Generally, when they go after you for a plea bargain, it either means their case is weak, so they don't really want to go to trial, or you have information they want more than revenge against you for whatever it is you did. Sometimes, though, they just want to avoid what would be an ugly (make them look bad) trial.

^-.-^

[wraiths_crono]

Yes and No, they did that to my cousin actually. The judge said since she agreed to the plea she had something to hide, and the judgement stands... It was crappy as they always pointed to that at retrial.

[Panacea]

Which is why if I were ever caught in that situation I would refuse to plead guilty. At best, I'd agree to an Alford Plea.

In an Alford Plea you concede the state probably has enough evidence to convict you, but do not admit guilt.

In this hypothetical situation, though, you are describing prosecutorial misconduct. The state cannot make up evidence against you. The police can lie to you about evidence during an interrogation. However, before trial the lawyers go through a process called discovery. The prosecution has to turn over all its evidence to the defense. If the evidence were manufactured, that's a serious crime and would be grounds for a new trial (assuming the defense lawyer didn't figure it out and put a stop to it before it happened).

[flybye023]

I know of a situation similar to wraiths_crono's. The person pled in accordance to all the agreements with everyone then found out that he maybe shouldn't have and then was nailed for perjury.

[Mytical]

The police can lie to get a confession. If they say they have proof, but don't nothing you can do. If they have proof that is fake, maybe. Ie Planted evidence, etc. If you can prove it, then I believe you can do something. Them LYING is not illegal, them planting evidence is, and is grounds for a new trial. Confessions gotten can be overturned if there is proof of 'undo diress' if I am not mistaken.

[Gravekeeper]

Police interrogation is flawed as is, seeing as it has almost as high a confession rate from innocent people as it does from actual guilty suspects. Turns out when you throw someone in a windowless room, stress them out and verbally assault them for a while they'll agree to anything to get out. ;p

Hence you should use your right to remain silent and get a lawyer. Interrogation tends to exploit the fact that the average person may not realise their rights in an interrogative situation.

[Andara Bledin]

As people in the know will tell you: Never talk to the police.

^-.-^