Final Exclusion Analysis

In the United State we have many systems, like all others, it is separated the use of some irrelevant or untrustworthy evidence. The system that I am referring to and the one that we will be discussing in this paper is the exclusionary rule. It is the introduction of a good evidence, that it is obtained by a bad law enforcement, is most common in the United State than other countries legal system. To put it in other words, the exclusionary rule is controversial. Therefore, many experts say that it sets criminals free on minor points. In this paper, I will speak about the pros and cons of the exclusionary rule, how it is effecting the criminal justice system of the United State. In addition, I will speak and summarize the case of Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott from 1998, this will be a great example of the exclusionary rule and the effects about them. Furthermore, I will show how this case was important with the Exclusionary Rule, and my opinion on the matter.

The judicial system of the United Kingdom exists as a complex and intricate system of law that has been practiced, and adjusted over a thousand years to reach the point as is known in the present. The complexities of the judicial system presents itself as different variations of the legal system within the United Kingdom, where although they have their differences, they also share certain similarities between them. One such similarity is that they all hold certain requirements for Judges which exist as a centralized idea within the judicial system, as they are not entirely separated between the varying legal systems of the United Kingdom. The complexities and similarities of the United Kingdom’s judicial system will be explored through their: structure, documentation, categorization, and the requirements of judges; where all of which will create a clearer picture to better understand how these elements operate. The paper will be divided into two categories: the Judicial System, and the Requirements of Judges. First, the judicial system will be explored through it’s structure, documentation, and classification of a legal system; and secondly will move into the certain requirements that judges have in the United Kingdom. Both elements serve to essentially build a foundation that explains a clearer picture of how the judicial system of the United Kingdom practices law, and the expectations those in power hold.

There are many aspects of the criminal justice system that must be considered when determining the most important. Each area of the criminal justice system has its place and plays an important role in the process. For example, an arrest cannot be made without the police, the case cannot be reviewed or adjudicated without the courts, and the convicted individual cannot be placed into supervised confinement without corrections. However, the courts are the most important aspect of the criminal justice system because the decisions made in and outside the court system can serve as a guide for the other areas of the criminal justice system to follow. More specifically, judges and prosecutors hold tremendous power and can shape how laws are enforced,

In this paper, I am going to discuss the legal system as the courts handle it, we will take a look at fictional portrayals and an actual court case that occurred. The purpose of this is to ascertain the difference between the two if there is any. In the U. S. A. we have three systems of the government that each have their own specific role independent of each other, but still heavily reliant on the other. These systems all work together in all aspects of the legal system, with the court system heavily responsible for “Enforcement, interpretation, invalidation, and making law.” (The US Legal System, 2009) One of the major

The judiciary and judicial decisions epoch, is to reflect the values and issues of the society as whole, that they should be aware of current trends. There is a growing sentiment that judges, are out touch with society, the idea that judges are out of touch is generally of a public view upon sentencing, that judges are too lenient when it comes to penalties to criminal offences. The media has played a role in the idea that judges are out of touch, while making references to sentencing.

This paper, examines the American and Nigerian adjudicatory processes. The American and Nigerian adjudicatory process have so many similarities, which includes: they are both common law countries, they both practice the adversarial system of adjudication, and they both have a Bench trial adjudicatory process in which the judge is the sole arbiter of the adjudicatory process, and controls the legal proceedings before him. However, there is a core difference in the American and Nigerian adjudicatory system, which is: American adjudicatory system has a jury trial process, while the Nigerian adjudicatory system does not have a jury trial process. This core

Judges are chosen to hold the fate of many individuals in the palm of their hands. The famous saying “with great power, comes great responsibility,” is true and practiced evermore in the court room. Whether a judge is appointed or elected, there are many factors that can influence a judge’s decision in pretrial and in sentencing. In this research paper, I will share some of the most common factors that influences a judge’s discretion, and also the ways the factors result sentencing of an offender. Furthermore, I will bring to attention some of the more controversial factors and ways they have influenced the outcome of the court process.

Each year thousands of people are tried through the criminal justice system and each case is unique in its own way. This essay will evaluate three real life cases where, a case depict the unique processes related to different courts, a defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial, and a case where a defendant was wrongly accused and later exonerated.

Sarah J. Barnett Mr. W. Gissy Econ 2300/05 February 22, 2005 Case Study 1 – Hamilton County Judges 1. Based on the information provided in the Hamilton County Judges’ case study, the probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the three different courts are: a. For the total cases disposed in the Common Pleas Court there is a 0.1129 probability of a case being appealed and reversed. b. For the total cases disposed in the Domestic Relations Court there is a 0.1604 probability of a case being appealed and reversed. c. For the total cases disposed in the Municipal Court there is a 0.2080 probability of a case being appealed and reversed. 2. The probability of a case being appealed, per judge, is: a. Common Pleas Court: Judge Fred

In our judicial system, new cases can be decided based on past decisions in our courts that were of similar circumstances. This means a legal precedent was set, which provides a level of consistency for interpreting the law (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Trial court judges can set precedent, however, it is normally reserved for the written findings of appellate judges (Bohm & Haley, 2011). In fact, appellate judges are obligated to put their decisions in writing (Bohm & Haley, 2011). These written findings set legal precedents and are known by many as common law (Bohm & Haley, 2011).

“The rules of precedent reflect the practice of the courts and have to be applied bearing in mind that their objective is to assist in the administration of justice. They are of considerable importance because of their role in achieving the appropriate degree of certainty as to the law. This is an important requirement of any system of justice. The principles should not however, be regarded as so rigid that they cannot develop in order to meet contemporary needs.”

Since the previous study did not show any significant results the researchers realized that since there was a longer period of time in postreview of course there was

The differences in various results discussed in this paper stem from the fact that most of the studies were carried out using different sampling

The performance of judges can be measured, generally speaking, by the ability of the judges. There are some methods used to measure the performances of judges for this purpose. These include a review of the past performance of the judges. Here, the judges are gauged according to citations to prior judgments, affirmation of the judges' by higher courts and the ability to produce and put pressure. The judges may also be measured by their native talents and experiences whereby issues of the number of years a particular judge has been working at the lower courts and the quality of the law school they might have attended. Another measure for the quality of judges is depreciating ability; some judges' performance may decline due to cognitive impairments, while others may gain experience over time. These measures are geared towards ensuring that a high quality of judicial performance is guaranteed and maintained (Choi et al, 2011).

This change of practice can significantly affect the interpretation of the studies results depending on the regions from which the study research was developed.