Court Observation At Harris County Criminal Justice Court

Everyone was subjected to security including the lawyers and employees of the court house. Everyone was either in some type of uniform or dressed extremely formal, even if they were just spectators. Few people were in the court room, but not many. The judge, lawyers and people that were being represented had not still entered the building. Moments later the plaintiff, Dawn-Evans Donahue, and the defendant Joseph Donahue with their lawyers Michael Morris and John M. Makowski, entered the court room. They had taken their place on each of the court room to make their cases in front of the judge. The bailiff then told us to all rise for their entrance of Judge Polansky. We all rose and took our seats. The court had now been set in motion for deliberation. The judge was wearing the standard gown that is portrayed in films and in real life, there was no jury because this was not a trial court, this was a family matters case.

Author Steve Bogira wrote a book based on his experiences over one ear in Chicago’s County Criminal Courthouse. His book Courtroom 302 goes through numerous cases and trials during the book, and gives the reader an inside look at what really is going on inside of the courtrooms. The key player in this book are the defendants, deputies, prosecutors, attorneys, and jurors. However, the judge of the courtroom, Judge Daniel Locallo is the main character most of the book is around, because he handles all of these cases.

The counties in Texas have an odd relationship with the state government and the Texas constitution. The counties are under the state and they are required to handle duties that the state rants them. However, the counties are strongly against the involvement of the state government. Brown (2014) states that “both county officials and county residents see them as local governments and resent any state ‘interference’” (p.110). The counties are charged with the responsibilities of collecting taxes on both urban and rural property, issues state automobile licenses, enforce state laws, register voters, conduct elections, and help administer justice. The counties, along with state and federal governments, “conducts health and welfare programs, maintains

The Texas criminal justice system has several key objectives: discover the truth, provide for public safety, assist the victims of the crime, punish the guilty, and promote positive change in the offending behavior. The purpose of the Criminal Justice System is to deliver justice for all, by convicting and punishing the guilty and helping them stop the offending, while protecting the innocent.

In the human services field it’s likely workers will have contact with the court and legal system. The differences in the human services profession and the legal systems can become challenging for workers. Such as dissimilarities in prerogatives and values, prove this challenge for human services workers (Kennedy, Richards, & Leiman, 2013). Human service work practice requires an understanding of social policy’s impact in specific areas. As practitioners grasping how theories concerning fundamental principals of social policy have implications for human services agencies and for the individuals who are the users of the services (Carson & Kerr, 2014). This paper will discuss a case observed at Beenleigh Magistrates Courthouse. It will also look at the multiple roles and responsibilities of Human Service professionals appearing in the legal system, as well as the importance of ethical writing and possible tensions between the legal system and human services profession.

Bogira paints a portrait of some of the more personal and nuanced day-to-day activities that go into courtroom behavior and decision making. Describe some of the often overlooked aspects of day-to-day court operations (i.e., judges background, public pressures, defense attorney and prosecutorial ambitions, etc.) and how they may affect court outcomes for defendants. Bogira paints a portrait of the real side of the law and after reading Courtroom 302 I’m applauded at the things I’ve read. Bogira’s showed a different side to prosecutors, detectives, and judges detailing the little to no interest they had in righting the wrongs caused by the court.

During this case, I watched a criminal court hearing for James King, the defendant, who allegedly threatened a judge, the plaintiff.

The Texas Constitution governs and backs the legislative process which consist of applicable statues. The two bicameral chambers of legislature is the House and the Senate. The House and Senate adopt actions and rules that are reviewed by these two bicameral chambers. The origin of the bill is the main concern for the legislative process. This is where the bill begins and returns to when it is reviewed by the different chambers. “When drafting a bill, legislation has the ability to request services from the Texas legislative Council” (Henson J, & Morris J Ch. 4). In addition, when drafting the bill they may call in further assistance from the Senate department. The bill may address concerns over particular issues and or special interest that legislature has. The bill can be repealed, enacted, and amended from different members on legislature. The Legislative Board is a review board “that drafts appropriations for the general bill” (Ch. 4). Different bills consist of single or various subjects, an appropriation bill is one of those bills that addresses different subjects.

On July 22, 2015 I witnessed a trial with three defendants Rahmel Bond, Jermaine Butts, Demetrius Gill. All three alleged criminals are being charged with the shooting death of William Jordan during a robbery. While waiting for the trial to start I observed the atmosphere of the court room, I was expecting to see a few reporters, family members of the victim or even for the defendants. There was only me and the assistant for the district attorney in the crowd, when I summed up the courage, I informed her that I was a criminal justice major and was sitting in to witness the trial; she then explain to me what was the proceedings for that day. The prosecutor who is assistant district attorney Deingeniis was ending his closing arguments on that

In my opinion, the charges should have been dismissed against the individuals that pleaded guilty through plea bargain. The reason is that the lawsuit was able to illustrate that the prosecutor was racially motivated to incarcerated American Americans, even if they were innocent. Secondly, there was no strong evidence introduced that would uphold a conviction. The tape recordings that they had were alleged to drug transition occurring, however, you could not hear anything but noise in the background. In addition, the credibility of the confidential informant was questioned, because his stories was switching back and forth indicating that it was possibly fabricated. Lastly, the military drug sweep was achieved unlawfully without the use of

On July 18th 2017 at about 3:30pm my classmates and I went to a felony trial at the Manhattan Supreme court. I attended the trial to listen and take notes for a class assignment. The presiding judge’s name was Justice Gregory Carro,

I went to go check in the juror assembly room to check for trials, they only knew of one later on in the criminal court. I went to Judge Samuels courtroom because that is where the trial was going to occur later in the day. When I arrived Judge Samuels was doing arraignments which, I found out were very common in the criminal courts. She would give the defendants who had DUI’s options between time in county jail or community service. One of the cases that stood out was a defendant who needed psych sessions. The defendant had just been given a trial and was found guilty so, they had to sentence her. The defendant was convicted of three counts one of them being assault with a deadly weapon, which happened to be a car.

In Philadelphia, just blocks from where, both, the United States Declaration of Independence and Constitution were debated and ratified, sits the Juanita Kidd Stout Center for Criminal Justice (hereinafter C.J.C.). Unfortunately, somehow in those few blocks, or many years, our sense of justice and fairness were lost.

On Friday, April, 4, 2014, I observed the Vanderburgh County Superior Court to observe different family law cases. The cases I heard involved contempt of court for failing to pay child support, failure to appear for a court appointed drug test, birth certificate affidavit, request for contest hearing time, and an issue of paternity case. Magistrate Judge Sheila M. Corcoran was presiding over the family court hearings. When entering the courthouse, I was greeted by security and advised to remove any cell phones, and/or, any other items that would trigger a metal detector. After this, I proceeded straight to look for the family courtroom. After roaming around mindlessly for a couple minutes, I decided to ask the courthouse officer monitoring

I went to the court on October 13, around 10:30. When I first walked in there were a lot of people there I wasn’t expecting that at all. Security was higher than at the magistrate court. There were attorneys there but they stand next to there defendants at all times since it was still assembly justice so the trials didn’t go on for days if the most for about 30 minutes. The first case I had a chance was already on its way so I don’t know how long it had been going on for. The defendant was wearing a dark blue jump suit. As well as he had some chains aournd his waist