Criminal Litigation Procedure

Police officers conduct a preliminary review and pre-arrest inquiry to accurately determine if legally sufficient cause exists to warrant a full-scale criminal litigation investigation. This crucial phase typically includes interviewing witnesses and meticulously assessing whether "probable cause" legally exists to believe a specific criminal offense has indeed been committed. If the findings justify it, this process directly leads to a formal arrest or a court summons, which actively progresses the overall criminal procedure.

Upon confirmation of definitive probable cause, law enforcement officers are legally authorized to take the suspected individual into custody and detain them. Police can execute a "warrantless arrest" if the crime occurred in their immediate presence, or they can formally seek an "arrest warrant" from a judge when judicial review is necessary, as stipulated by D.C. Code § 23–581. This ensures that constitutional safeguards are upheld for all parties throughout the sensitive criminal litigation process.

After being arrested and processed (booked), a defendant is promptly presented before a judge for an "initial appearance," where a crucial probable cause determination may be addressed under Rule 5 of the Superior Court Rules. If sufficient evidence is found to exist, the judge will then set specific "bail conditions" or, in certain circumstances, order the formal "pretrial detention" of the accused, which represents an early and crucial decision within the overall criminal litigation process.

Under D.C. Code §23–1321, judges must determine the least restrictive means necessary to assure the defendant's future court appearances while mitigating any potential danger to the community. Judges must decide whether to release the defendant on simple "personal recognizance," impose specific "release conditions" (e.g., electronic monitoring or curfew), or, conversely, order full "detention" without bond if the defendant is deemed a significant flight risk or poses an imminent threat during the remaining criminal procedure.

The Office of the United States Attorney for D.C. holds broad discretionary authority in deciding how to proceed with the pending criminal procedure. Options include officially initiating a "no-papering" process (formally declining to prosecute), formally filing an "information" document for minor misdemeanors, or actively seeking a formal "grand jury indictment" for more serious felony offenses. This determination is heavily influenced by the weight of the evidence collected and the prosecutor’s ultimate assessment of the case's strength in court.

A substantial majority of all criminal litigation cases ultimately conclude with a binding "plea agreement," which legally allows the defendant to plead guilty to a charge in exchange for reduced charges or a more lenient sentencing recommendation, thereby effectively bypassing a full trial. If a negotiated "plea deal" is not successfully reached by the parties, the case formally proceeds to the rigorous "trial preparation" phase, which is the next major step in the long and complex criminal procedure.

If the defendant is found guilty and formally convicted of the criminal offense, the presiding judge is legally obligated to impose penalties based on D.C. Code Title 22, meticulously considering the nature and severity of the crime, the defendant's prior criminal history, and the victim's impact. Sentencing, the solemn conclusion to the main criminal procedure, may involve severe penalties such as mandatory "incarceration" in a correctional facility, mandated "probation" or community supervision, or significant financial penalties like substantial "fines or restitution orders" paid directly to the victims of the offense.