[Alberta's Child]

... but identifying alternative legal theories in support of your position is just good and competent lawyering.

From my conversations with attorneys in several states, this approach to "lawyering" is considered highly unethical when employed by a prosecutor.

A prosecutor's job isn't to run off on wild tangents with remote plausible connections to existing statutes in a desperate attempt to pursue a criminal conviction against a citizen whose innocence is presumed in the absence of solid evidence.

[Williams]

Correct.

[Bob Wills is still the king]

Most prosecution cases are run of the mill thefts, assaults, and homicides; all of which have well established bodies of supporting law at the federal and state levels.

Prosecutors routinely use novel legal charging theories in cases of first impression, and in cases where fact patterns may be unclear under the statutes. Technology crimes are one large and current example of that approach, as are complex fraud crimes. Bitcoin fraud is one current example.

[Bob Wills is still the king]

You don’t have to agree with them, but the ABA produces the prosecutorial guidelines used across the country’s legal system. The same “canons” are also codified in the DOJ’s prosecution manual.

Check them out and you’ll find Smith and other prosecutors have wide ranging authority in that area.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/

[Bob Wills is still the king]

Here’s the DOJ’s formal charging manual, which Smith is required to comply with.

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-federal-prosecution

I don’t have any faith it is being followed, but these are the rules Smith is supposed to be following.