quote:
But it isn't really the job of the DAs office to make sure someone doesn't have a felony on their record. It's the individual's job to make sure they don't have a felony on their record. If they can't do that, why should they be helped?

It is the DA' s job to use his or her discretion in charging defendants with the appropriate charge. That decision is based on a variety of factors, including the nature of the evidence (how solid is it?), the nature of the crime (who was harmed and the nature of the harm), the likelihood that the defendant will stay out of trouble in the future, the age of the defendant, the likelihood that a jury will convict, the likelihood that there will be a plea, time and cost to prosecute the case vis a vis other pending cases that may be of higher priority given limited resources. DAs are also often influenced, though most would not admit it, by public reaction to choices the DA makes in choosing to prosecute as a felony, reduce charges to a misdemeanor, etc.

Our criminal system has as goals both punishment and rehabilitation. The DA to some degree is the first person in the system who tries to balance those goals. In a victimless crime situation or where the harm is fairly minimal, if the DA can use his discretion to help put someone on path away from crime through his choices of which crimes should be charged, it makes a lot of sense to try to try to get an outcome that is best for the defendant and society generally. Imprisonment is expensive for us taxpayers and often counterproductive when other approaches can give a better outcome.

This post was edited on 5/18/16 at 9:33 pm