Illinois Court Structure

The dual court system in the United States consists of a federal court system and a state court system. The judicial branch is responsible for deciding the meaning of laws, determining how to apply them to real situations, and whether a law breaks the rules of the constitution.

One hundred years ago, the Illinois legislature enacted the Illinois Juvenile Court Act (1899 Ill. Laws 132 et seq.), creating the first separate juvenile court. The policy debates raging around the country in this centennial year(1899), however, make it uncertain whether the traditional juvenile court will prevail. Early in the 19th century, juveniles were tried along with adults in criminal courts. In common law, children under

The Federal Court System is one of the most essential and significant functions to help settle a matter. Much work is involved in the application of a body of rules and principals of rulings. The path the Federal Courts have to take in order to be heard by the Supreme Court is a lengthy process. Given millions of disputes every year, it becomes impossible for the Federal Courts to be heard by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has jurisdictions that limit the variety of cases that are clearly defined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has developed specific rules that within the jurisdictions will and will not hear. The Federal Court must show they have extreme and substantial evidence in the outcome of the case. In mootness, the Federal

The judge selection process in the USA today differs from one state to the other. Each state has its defined procedures to select and dismiss a judge from service. However, some of the States share the guidelines in choosing judges. Another common thing in the selection process is that all judges serve for a period of time upon which one is supposed to be elected to serve in the judiciary for another term. In this paper, the main focus is the selection process of the judge in Tennessee State. It also evaluates the similarities and differences between Tennessee State selection processes against Texas State.

In reviewing the court system of the United States there is a definite hierarchy between the trial courts, appellate courts and the supreme courts of both the state and federal levels. However, the actions of the court systems move at such a slow and hindered pace because of the bureaucracy of motions and objections among many others. The following is a review of the type of court system the United States has and why. Along with judges sentencing goals and philosophy; and sentencing innovations.

When I had told my friends I couldn’t eat breakfast with them on Monday morning they gave me a puzzled look, as we always eat breakfast everyday together. After some confusion I had to tell them sorry I can’t, I have to go to court. I got even more confusion. They probably thought “Oh no what has she done or what happened?” but truth soon be told that I was going there just to watch some court cases. Upon telling them that it was just for an assignment, they all looked relieved that they hadn’t befriended a convict in their first 2 months of college.

Courts play a vital role in the Criminal Justice System in America, however; understanding how the courts work and function is essential. Even the general public should have a basic knowledge regarding the similarities and differences of the jurisdiction and structure of our dual court system – federal and state. In addition, there are ethical and diversity issues that can be experienced by each of the courts that could possibly impact the courts’ functioning.

United States judge Irving R. Kaufman once said, “The judicial system is the most expensive machine ever invented for finding out what happened and what to do about it.” Over the course of the United States, the Supreme Court has decided issues which have a great impact on future generations. The leader of this court needs to have intricate understanding of the United State Constitution and judicial system. By holding many different roles in the judicial process,

Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.

People in the United States attend court every day for different many reasons. Those reasons could be for traffic violations, civil law suits, or for unlawful criminal acts. No matter what they are all handled and disputed in a court of law. Courts are empowered to make fair and binding decisions upon the facts that are received. There are two types of courts; civil court and criminal court. It is very important that people understand and know the differences between civil and criminal courts. Civil courts handle resolutions between private parties and usually consist of one party suing the other for some type of monetary damages. Criminal

The requirements needed to practice law today consist of an undergraduate school degree, an impressive Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) score and grade point average, a law school diploma and a successful completion of the Bar Exam. There exists no legal boundaries or barriers to the practice of law, only the desire and work to do so. Subsequently, the percentage of female students enrolled in law schools across the United States has remained at nearly half of the population of universities since 2000. This percentage is

Facts: The respondent Jeffery Landrigan was convicted of murder, during his incarceration he stabbed and killed an inmate. Three years later, Mr. Landrigan escaped prison and killed Chester Dyer. Mr. Landrigan was found guilty of second degree murder, burglary, and felony murder. During the sentencing phase of the trial, Mr. Landrigan counsel attempted to present mitigating evidence to the judge. The mitigating evidence was Mr. Landrigan ex-wife, and birth mother, whom were not allowed to testify. Mr. Landrigan counsel explained to the judge, that his client did not want any testimony from his family. Mr. Landrigan counsel tried to explain the importance of both witness but Mr. Landrigan did not allow him to speak (counsel). The judge asked Mr. Landrigan if he had anything to add before he sentenced him. The defendant said to give him the death penalty. The trial judge sentenced Landrigan to death. After the trial, Landrigan filed a notion, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. Mr. Landrigan petitioned for habeas corpus, challenging the state court for not allowing mitigating evidence to be presented under the death penalty act of 1996.

Abstract: Throughout learning about politics in the United States, the judiciary sticks out as the branch that does not represent the American people. Supreme Court Justices are not elected into office and they also serve life terms. This paper will not argue that this should not be the case, but it will argue that this furthers the disconnect between politicians and the electorate. It will give a brief history of the Supreme Court and then argue that in recent years, especially since the establishment of the certiorari pool, that the Supreme Court has furthered disconnect. This paper will also discuss the different ways justices vote, big cases in history, and how much power a Supreme Court justice really has. It will look into how the ideology of the court changed over the past two hundred years and how it has led up to the current situation we are in today with the death of Antonin Scalia.

There are three women on the Supreme Court, one of whom is Latina, and there is one black justice serving on the Supreme Court (Brown, 2016). This is a major issue. The United States, the “melting pot”, has an extreme lack of diversity in their court system. This is an issue that affects several aspects of society. Decisions made by judges will affect the lives of men, women, and their families. The decisions made by judges can also create law. Unlike political officials, the people do not always have the power to vote judges into their positions. Instead, the people hope that their peers with the power to affect the system choose a candidate that will fight for them. Often times, this does not happen.

For this assignment while wanting to focus more on crimes committed by a courtroom actor, I will instead write about the less known, but no less important appointment of a new magistrate judge for the Sothern district of Indiana. While to most the hiring of a magistrate judge does not sound like a big deal, but to law students who can recognize the importance of magistrate judges can appreciate the importance of this article.