The House of Delegates of the Oregon State Bar (the state agency to which all practicing lawyers in Oregon must belong) is about to consider some revisions to the ethical rules that govern lawyers in Oregon. In particular, the House will be asked to recommend that the Oregon Supreme Court move away from Oregon’s ethical rules and adopt a version of the model ethical rules of the American Bar Association.
One of the proposed rules, Rule 3.8, sets out the special responsibilities of a prosecutor. The version previously under consideration assigned four special ethical duties to prosecutors: (a) not to prosecute a criminal charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause, (b) to make reasonable efforts to assure that a criminal defendant has been advised of his or her right to have a lawyer and has had an opportunity to hire a lawyer, (c) not to try to get an unrepresented defendant to waive the right to a lawyer and the right to silence, unless the court has approved the defendant’s representing himself or herself or the defendand has knowingly waived those rights, and (d) to disclose all mitigating evidence to the defense, and at the time of sentencing, to the court.
The revision under consideration gets rid of obligations (b) and (c). The handout from the Bar doesn’t explain why prosecutors in Oregon shouldn’t have to follow restrictions (b) and (c), but perhaps one of the Supreme Court justices will ask the question before they adopt these rules.