If a prosecutor realizes half-way through the process that the person they are accusing is innocent (due to new evidence), do they continue the process trying to put the person in jail? Does this happen often? How is this viewed?

What should happen is the prosecutor immediately filed a motion to dismiss the charges and apologizes to the defendant.

What all too often happens is they do nothing.

In reality this type of thing almost never happens. The vast majority of criminal cases are so simple they are almost purely formulaic.

Source: former prosecutor.

If the prosecutor sees evidence mid-trial that is exculpatory, they are required to share this information with the defense. The prosecutor is likely to make a motion to dismiss (or not object with the defense does).

I have only spoken to a few lawyers about this before, but they (some, maybe most) don’t care. I was told basically they are doing their job, and if the person is innocent, their lawyer should have done a better job for their client. It’s not about right and wrong, it’s about doing their job and ‘winning’.

Prosecutor defends the interest of the state, state as no interest in throwing innocents in jail, if mid trial their whole ease collapse, they will ask an innocent verdict to the court

Not often, since in the first place very few cases go to trial.

Most of the evidence used in the trial has to come out in discovery, which happens before the trial. So if the case fell apart at that point, it would just be dropped.

Even if the prosecution’s case is good but not great they’re likely to offer a plea deal to avoid the risk and expense of trial.

You can’t ambush the opposing side with surprise evidence, so it’s hard for me to imagine a case that looked solid enough to go to court, but in fact had some secret weakness thatbwouldnt become apparent during discovery. Itd have to be something really specific.