Prosecutors work for the government, not for the victim of the crime. At the federal level the client is the United States; at the state and local level it’s the people of that state or county. A criminal case is captioned “The People v.” or “The State v.” because a crime is treated as a wrong against the whole community, and the prosecutor’s job is to represent that community’s interest in enforcing its laws. Victims are central to many cases, but legally they are witnesses, not clients.
The Victim Is a Witness, Not a Client
This is the single most misunderstood part of the criminal justice system. When someone is harmed by a crime, it feels personal. But there is no attorney-client relationship between the prosecutor and the victim. The victim’s testimony is evidence the prosecutor uses to build the case. The decision to charge, to reduce charges, to offer a plea, or to drop the case entirely belongs to the prosecutor’s office alone.
That has real consequences. A prosecutor can offer the defendant a plea the victim finds insulting. A prosecutor can decline to file charges when the evidence looks weak, even if the victim is certain of what happened. These calls are driven by the strength of the evidence, the likelihood of conviction, and the broader public interest, weighed against the defendant’s constitutional rights and the resources the office has to spend. The victim’s perspective is part of the picture. It is not the deciding factor.
Federal Prosecutors and Who They Answer To
Federal prosecutors handle violations of federal law, including drug trafficking, tax fraud, and crimes that cross state lines. They are called United States Attorneys and Assistant United States Attorneys, and they work within the U.S. Department of Justice. The Attorney General sets their salaries and directs their reporting obligations.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 28 USC Chapter 35 – United States Attorneys
Each of the 94 federal judicial districts has a U.S. Attorney at the top, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a four-year term.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 28 USC Chapter 35 – United States Attorneys The Assistant U.S. Attorneys who handle the day-to-day caseload are hired by the Attorney General rather than elected.2Department of Justice. U.S. Attorneys Listing That structure ties federal prosecutors to the executive branch, and office priorities tend to reflect the current administration’s enforcement agenda.
State and Local Prosecutors
Most criminal cases in the United States, from assaults and burglaries to DUIs and homicides, are prosecuted at the state or local level. The head prosecutor goes by different titles depending on the jurisdiction: District Attorney, State’s Attorney, County Attorney, or County Prosecutor. The role is essentially the same across those labels.
In most states, that head prosecutor is an elected official. Only a handful of states, including Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, use an appointment system. Election makes a DA answerable to voters, which cuts both ways. Voters can remove a prosecutor whose judgment they question, but the pressure to win reelection can also push offices toward high-profile convictions over quiet, careful work. Either way, the client is still the public of that jurisdiction, not any individual complainant.
The Duty to Seek Justice
Every prosecutor, federal or state, operates under an ethical obligation that sets them apart from other lawyers. A defense attorney advocates zealously for one client. A prosecutor is supposed to seek justice. The Supreme Court put it this way in Berger v. United States: the government’s interest in a criminal case “is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.”3Cornell Law School. Berger v. United States
In practice, that means prosecutors are expected to protect the innocent as much as they pursue the guilty. If evidence surfaces that a defendant didn’t commit the crime, the prosecutor has an obligation to act on it, even if the case is already underway or a conviction has already been obtained. It also means a prosecutor can decline to bring a case the victim badly wants prosecuted, because the duty runs to justice in the public interest rather than to the person who filed the complaint.
Rights Crime Victims Actually Have
Prosecutors answering to the government does not mean victims are shut out. Federal law gives crime victims a specific set of rights through the Crime Victims’ Rights Act:
- The right to be reasonably protected from the accused.
- The right to timely notice of any public court proceeding, parole proceeding, or any release or escape of the accused.
- The right not to be excluded from public court proceedings.
- The right to be reasonably heard at proceedings involving release, plea deals, and sentencing.
- The reasonable right to confer with the federal prosecutor handling the case.
- The right to full and timely restitution as provided by law.
- The right to be informed of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement in a timely manner.
The right to confer is especially important. At least one federal appeals court has held that it attaches before the government finalizes a plea deal, meaning the prosecutor cannot simply inform the victim after the fact. The right does not give the victim veto power over the prosecutor’s decisions, but it does require the prosecutor to listen before making certain key calls.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 3771 – Crime Victims Rights
Every state also has its own victims’ rights provisions, and many have gone further than federal law, some through constitutional amendments. State-level protections commonly include notice of court dates, the right to submit a victim impact statement at sentencing, and protection from intimidation or harassment. Specifics vary. The general direction across the country is toward giving victims a more meaningful role in the process, even though the prosecutor remains the government’s lawyer.
What Victims Can Do When They Disagree With the Prosecutor
Knowing the prosecutor doesn’t work for you raises the obvious question: what can you actually do when a decision feels wrong? The options are limited but real.
If the prosecutor declines to bring charges or offers a deal the victim considers too lenient, the victim can contact the elected District Attorney directly, not just the assistant prosecutor assigned to the case. In offices where the DA is elected, the head prosecutor is accountable to voters and tends to take constituent complaints seriously. Victims can also contact their elected representatives, or reach out to the media, which can create political pressure even when it has no direct legal effect.
In a few states, victims can petition a court to appoint a special prosecutor when the regular office refuses to act. This generally requires showing probable cause that a crime was committed and that the regular prosecutor’s judgment is impaired or otherwise insufficient. Private criminal prosecution, where the victim essentially takes over the prosecution role, exists in a very small number of jurisdictions and is uncommon in practice.
The most reliable fallback is a civil lawsuit. Even if the prosecutor declines to pursue criminal charges, nothing prevents the victim from suing the person who harmed them in civil court. Civil cases carry a lower burden of proof, and a successful verdict can result in monetary compensation. A civil case will not put anyone in prison, but it can provide a measure of accountability when the criminal system does not.
Limits on Suing a Prosecutor
One boundary is worth stating plainly, because it surprises people. The Supreme Court held in Imbler v. Pachtman that prosecutors have absolute immunity from civil lawsuits for actions taken in their role as courtroom advocates: filing charges, presenting evidence, and making arguments at trial. That protection exists even if the prosecutor acted improperly, which means victims of prosecutorial misconduct generally cannot sue the prosecutor for damages based on those courtroom decisions.5Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409
Absolute immunity has limits. When prosecutors step outside their advocacy role and act as investigators or administrators, such as personally swearing out a false affidavit to obtain an arrest warrant, they lose that absolute protection and can be held to the same legal standard as other government officials. Prosecutors can also face discipline through their state bar for ethical violations, and in extreme cases can be criminally charged themselves. Those mechanisms exist, though they are rarely used.