Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-16138House OversightOther

State Victims' Rights Statutes and Prosecutorial Notification Requirements

The passage merely outlines legal provisions for victim notification and participation across various states. It contains no allegations, financial flows, or connections to powerful individuals or age Nearly 40 states require prosecutors to notify or confer with victims about plea negotiations. Arizona law defines victims based on criminal conduct, not formal charges, and mandates early rights Haw

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017630
Pages
2
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage merely outlines legal provisions for victim notification and participation across various states. It contains no allegations, financial flows, or connections to powerful individuals or age Nearly 40 states require prosecutors to notify or confer with victims about plea negotiations. Arizona law defines victims based on criminal conduct, not formal charges, and mandates early rights Haw

Tags

state-lawcriminal-procedurehouse-oversightlegal-frameworkprosecutorial-disclosurevictims-rights

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Page 27 of 31 104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59, *98 220 Notably, while the strength of these rights varies from state to state, nearly forty states require the prosecuting attorney to notify or confer with the victim regarding plea negotiations. 77! Several jurisdictions involve the victim in the charging decision. 722 In some states, law enforcement and prosecutors must involve the victim at any "critical" 723 or "crucial" 74 stage of the criminal proceeding; and in a minority of jurisdictions, the judge must ascertain whether the prosecutor has afforded the victim statutory protections prior to accepting a plea agreement. ?7° The general contours of state provisions suggest that several state governments have recognized the value in informing victims of their rights and involving them in the criminal process prior to the formal filing of charges. ?°° Indeed, a brief look at the statutory protections illustrates the extent to which states have attempted to afford protections to victims long before the formal filing of charges. [*99] For example, Arizona has adopted a constitutional amendment and statutes that expansively protect victims. Under Arizona law, the definition of victim hinges on whether a criminal offense has been committed, and the term "criminal offense" is defined as "conduct that gives a peace officer or prosecutor probable cause to believe" a crime has occurred. 777 In short, a victim's status does not hinge on the formal filing of charges but rather on the criminal conduct itself. 77° Arizona law enforcement personnel must give information to victims describing their rights as soon as possible, even if formal charges have not yet been filed, and a victim may request that the prosecutor discuss the disposition of the case, including "a decision not to proceed with a criminal prosecution, dismissal, plea, or sentence negotiations and pretrial diversion programs." 27? A victim may even pursue some rights if counts are dismissed. 73° Arizona courts have also permitted victims to invoke their rights in the context of civil forfeiture proceedings. 73! Hawaii's victims’ rights statute illustrates how a state has defined the term "case" more expansively than the limited definition advocated by the Department in order to facilitate victim participation. By statute in Hawaii, victims must, upon request, be informed of "major developments" in any felony case. 73? Along a similar vein, the prosecuting attorney must consult or 220 See generally Dean G. Kilpatrick et al., Nat'l Inst. of Justice, U.S. Dep't of Justice, The Rights of Crime Victims - Does Legal Protection Make a Difference? (1998), available at hitp-//goo.gl/EzH61S. I See Peggy M. Tobolowsky, Victim Participation in the Criminal Justice Process: Fifteen Years After the President's Task Force on Victims of Crime, 25 New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 21, 64 & n.168 (1999) (citing to victims' rights statutes in Connecticut, Illinois, and Michigan, among others). Unfortunately, as some commentators have noted, the notice and conferral provisions in some states are ambiguous, and the absence of case law precludes a definitive understanding of the reach of the right in some jurisdictions. See LaFave et al., supra note 168, § 21.3(f), at 1041-42; see also, e.g., Kan. Stat. Ann. § 74-7333(a)(5) (2002) ("The views and concerns of victims should be ascertained and the appropriate assistance provided throughout the criminal process."). In some jurisdictions, the ambiguous use of an illustrative list could be read as suggesting that a particular right, such as conferral, hinges on formal charges. See, e.g., Kv. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 421.500(6) (LexisNexis Supp. 2012) (requiring consultation on "disposition of the case including dismissal, release of defendant pending judicial proceedings, any conditions of release, a negotiated plea, and entry into a pretrial diversion program," but failing to define "disposition" or "case"). 222 See Tobolowsky, supra note 221, at 59-60. 23 Big, La. Rev. Stat. Ann.§§46:1842(2), 46:1844(K) (2010). 224 Fig. Fla. Const. art. I, § 16(b) (refraining from identifying the term). 225 See LaFave et al., supra note 168, § 21.3(f), at 1041. 226 See Victims' Rights Laws by State, supra note 218. 27 Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-4401(6) (2010) (emphasis added); see State ex rel. Thomas v. Klein, 150 P.3d 778, 780-81 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007) (noting the original version defined a criminal offense as a violation of a statute). DAVID SCHOEN

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Wire Refrefraining

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein

From: To: Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 19:09:33 +0000 Attachments: (USANYS)" < Sorry, I mean to send this to you a while ago. More of the same from him. From: Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 2:04 PM To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Schoen and Epstein It is literally unimaginable. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2019 22:38 To: Subject: Re: Schoen and Epstein Can you imagine moving forward with that case with David Schoen as the "quarterback" of the defense team? Yikes. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 29, 2019, at 9:06 PM, ) < > wrote: I got a hit on this as an end-of-year thing from my google alert on Epstein - I had not realized that he did a huge, crazy, absurdly self-aggrandizing interview on this!! https://atlantajewishtimes.timesofisrael.comijeffrey-epstein-consulted-atlanta-attomey-days-before-death/ I don't believe a word of his. Just unreal. From: Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 20:00 To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Schoen an

2p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00026451

0p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02541489

4p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01763941

9p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Proposal to Require Victim Input on Nolo Contendere Pleas Cited in CVRA Subcommittee Discussion

The passage outlines a procedural reform suggestion for federal criminal sentencing and notes an apparent oversight by the Advisory Committee. While it mentions Senator Feinstein, it does not provide Advocates amending Rule 11(a)(3) to require courts to consider victims' views before accepting a nol Senator Dianne Feinstein is quoted supporting broader victim rights under the Crime Victims' Right

1p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02456600

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.