Comparison of Judicial System of Usa and Vietnam

In the U.S. judicial system, a defendant found guilty in a trial court can normally appeal to a higher federal court. These federal courts, or appellate courts, review decisions made by trial courts (Neubauer, 2010). Appellate courts can be on the federal and state level, but do not hold trials or hear new evidence. These courts consist of a judge, or a lawyer, or a group of either one, who read the transcript of the trial and whether the previous decision correctly or incorrectly followed the law (Neubauer, 2010). Similar to trial courts, the federal government and most states have made two different types of appellate courts: intermediate, which hear all cases, and supreme courts, which can pick and choose the cases heard (Neubauer, 2010). Even though there are many different types of courts within the judicial system of the United States, the role of the judge stays constant throughout the majority of branches.

The dual court system differentiates between the state and federal court systems. The federal court system was established in accordance with constitutional law, which allows Congress to ordain federal courts that are separate from and external to the Supreme Court but which also deal with federal legal matters. These separate federal courts are referred to as "inferior courts," in relation to their position in the hierarchy with the Supreme Court at the summit. Each of the inferior courts established by Congress has a specific and unique jurisdiction.

The United States district courts are the trial courts of the federal court system. The district courts have jurisdiction over every category of federal cases ranging from civil cases to criminal cases. There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The Virgin Islands; Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands are three U.S. territories that have district courts that hear federal cases, including bankruptcy cases.

The U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court are governed by Article III of the US Constitution. They also include two special courts: (a) the U.S. Court of Claims and (b) the U.S. Court of International Trade. Often times than not the two

The criminal courts are responsible for determining the guilt or innocence of the person that is accused (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). As well as the courts are supposed to conclude the appropriate sentence while protecting their rights of the accused. The outcome that comes from the criminal courts is that the judgement is made to be fair, impartial and no political intrusion. Furthermore, the main focus of the courts is the find the fundamental problems, the interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration and the accountability to the community. (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). The court is supposing to keep the fairness and equality through the society.

Court History and Purpose. The courts are a critical component of American criminal justice because they determine what should happen to people charged with violating the law. Courts are important beyond criminal justice, too. Disputes that arise between private parties, businesses, government officials, and the like are brought to court in order to ensure that they are heard, ideally, in a neutral forum (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2011). Succeeding in liberation and independence is difficult within the world and as simple as legally right and legally wrong. Courts emphasize on the power of the state and the legitimate use of force and protect people against the random use of legislative authority. The tension among the general

* The author will determine courtroom groups, how the groups interact daily, and recommend changes to the groups. The author will also describe prosecutor roles and the cases he pursues. Finally, the author will elaborate on the funnel of criminal justice with the backlog among the courtroom group, the court system, give an example, and explain how to eliminate backlog cases.

The courts play a vital role in the criminal justice system. It provides a forum for laws to be upheld and offers victims justice for crimes committed against them (Siegel, et al., 2011). Furthermore, the role of the court is to impose rulings in a way that is fair and unbiased. While it may be challenging, judges must strive to be impartial and reach decisions based on what the law stipulates. They must also fulfill their role in the criminal justice system by issuing rulings despite the weight of public opinion.

In addition to the contrasts between the state court system and federal court system, there are also similarities which are; the federal district

The American court system has two different components: the court systems of the various states and territories and then the federal court system. Each state's court system is unique, but most of them generally follow the same basic structure as the federal court system. The first level of court is the trial court. In the United States these are the U.S. District Courts. There are also a variety of trial-level courts with specialized purposes, such as tax courts and admiralty courts.

The criminal trial process is an interesting process that takes place in Courtrooms all across the United States and throughout the globe. This study intends to set out the various steps in the criminal trial process in the American justice system. A trial is described as a "legal forum for resolving individual disputes, and in the case of a criminal charge, it is a means for establishing whether an accused person is legally guilty of an offense. The trial process varies with respect to whether the matter at issue is civil in nature or criminal. In either case, a jury acts as a fact-finding body for the court in assessing information and evidence that is presented by the respective parties in a case. A judge presides over the court and addresses all the legal issues that arise during the trial. A judge also instructs the jury how to apply the facts to the laws that will govern in a given case." (3rd Judicial District, 2012)

There are 94 different federal trial courts call District Courts. The role of these district courts are to hear civil and criminal cases. Those district courts are broken down into 12 different regional circuits, each of the 12 regional circuits have their own court of appeals. These court of appeals deals with appeals within their circuit. Those appeals are then heard and their fate is then decided based on the record that was given before the District Court. All the cases that involve juvenile issues, child custody and Dupree cases, inheritance/probate cases, real estate, as well as most cases that involve criminal prosecution, personal injury cases, disputes and contracts, as well as public health cases. Each state handle local laws, has its own police, and court system. Each court system has its own Supreme Court which is known as the court of last resort. Local crimes in cases go before their local courts and from there it's it is decided whether or not the case goes before the state, supreme, or federal court.

In the american court room there are several people involved. Some of the most important and lawful figures include: the judge, who is the main authority and the one responsible for justice. The prosecuting attorney, responsible for presenting the case against the defendant. The defense counsel, who is in

Most people don’t know about the three major components of the criminal justice system, but, in this paper the reader will know what they are. The reader will also read about how the three components interrelate to one another, and also how the conflict one another. The

The criminal justice system of the United States is based on a system fragmentation and operation. This system consists of overlapping powers between the state and federal laws that creates a conflict with regards to criminal justice. Consequently, this generates a dysfunctional and inefficient system that a times fails to produce credibility in criminal justice. The rationale behind this is that there is no clear interpretation concerning where federal law ends and where state law begins.