King County Court Case Analysis

With respects to personnel services, Thurston County District Court facilities continue to limit the court’s ability to best serve the citizens of Thurston County. It has been stated that “A well‐designed courthouse facility has the ability to embody the court’s essential principles of openness and fairness, providing accessibility and security while allowing the judicial process to move forward unhindered and with increased efficiency and effectiveness.” Currently, Thurston County resources are limited which requires each department to thoroughly examines and search for efficiencies. “The county has engaged in a budget freeze which has required all general fund departments to roll over 2014 budget numbers”. The District Court is entirely funded by the General

Beginning on February 24, 2014, and extending through March of 2015, the parties filed a litany of motions to either enforce or modify the circuit court’s judgment in the divorce decree. Namely, Father filed a Petition for Modification of Custody and Additional Relief, an Expedited Motion for Reduction in

Being located in the Federal building I have received tours of the court rooms and have had the opportunity to meet the judges and their staff. I feel I have been given a great lenses to observe the interworking of the courthouse and how cases progress through the criminal justice system. In working with the agents in particular, I have been able to see the different ways a federal case can be assembled within the guidelines and can lead to a federal

In this instant appeal, Mr. Shoemaker asserts that the circuit court erred by imposing an improper purge provision after finding him to be in contempt, and that the circuit court erred in finding that Mr. Shoemaker would be liable for alimony payments in accordance with the parties’ original separation agreement. We shall address both of these arguments in turn.

Plaintiff’s petition alleges three issues with the agency’s action under K.S.A. 77-621, but none of the three issues meet muster under the law. The three issues they allege are 1) the agency action is unconstitutional; 2) the agency engaged in unlawful procedure or has failed to follow prescribed procedure; and 3) the agency action is based on a determination of fact that is not supported by evidence that is substantial when viewed in light of the whole record. These three issues represent the only grounds that the Plaintiff has chosen to challenge Fort Hayes State University’s decision on and so under the statute they are the only grounds which this Court can consider. Neither the law, nor the facts of this case support a decision to overturn FHSU’s decision to suspend Herrel.

Frist of all the judge as no right to decide happy endings for people if both parties are not in agreement with such arrangement or decision; and what the judge should have included is to ask the case worker to supervise the placement of Sandy with her mother, by making sure everything is going well. Also, the judge would have given the other advocates the chances to address their concerns by discussing their investigative research on the case.

On October 21, 2014 I went to a court to listen in on some proceedings. It was pretty difficult to find one that was open to the public in this court. Many courtrooms were private or some hearings were irrelevant with what I was looking for. The bailiffs were really nice they helped guide us to the big courtroom that allowed proceedings to be heard by the public. There were some trials that we couldn’t attend because it was a more serious crime or there were juveniles involved and since they are under age we couldn’t be there for it. The courtroom I was in had a professional atmosphere to it but kind of unorganized because there were a bunch of papers all over the place and some of the inmates didn’t show up so the judge would put them to the side. Majority of the inmates being held for drugs, driving under the influence, or physical violence.

The second case Plata v. Davis the State a California realized that nothing has changed to better the medical care for prisoners that are staying in one of the thirty-three prisons in California (Specter, 2010). Both of these cases take a look at how the medical needs of prisoners are being neglected that results in injury and death (Specter, 2010). The reasoning for such neglect for the health of inmates comes down to the problem of overcrowding; severe overcrowding makes it impossible to keep a prison safe (Specter, 2010). The two California court cases were combined into one case Plata v. Schwarzenegger when taken to a three-judge court (Griffin III et al., 2013).

On October 28, 2015, in the capital court of the Harris County Criminal Courts at Law, Judge Mark Kent Ellis, who was working on a murder case that happened in late 2013. My first experience when I had entered the court building was through the security area where I had to take all my belongings and place it in a bin before going through the metal detector. After that, I went to the 20th floor where there were some cases that were scheduled to begin. I entered one of the courtrooms and sat down with other students and waited for the attorneys and their clients to enter the courtroom along with Judge Ellis. Around 9:30 AM, Hon. Judge Mark Kent Ellis entered and the case began to take place. Unlike the broadcast that I had seen online, there was no introduction about the case, rather the attorney for the plaintiff started to ask the witness or the plaintiff about the case. The murder case number was not mentioned, but it was between Johnathan Sanchez, the defendant, versus the Plaintiff who was the witness of the case that his name was not

In the courtroom, people were insulated from Arizona’s torrid weather, as well as the flurrying media attention. A retinue of attorneys surrounded the man on trial: a highly controversial retired Sheriff of Maricopa County. The tedium which is characteristic of court proceedings pervaded in spite of the polarizing nature of the case.

On April 10th, 2017 I, Cherise Dugger, observed the proceedings of multiple criminal hearings in the Aztec District Court in the courtroom of Judge Bradford J. Dalley. It was here that I observed out of my element as a dance instructor and mother and became part of the audience of the court. Being unacquainted with court proceedings, I directed myself towards the back of the courtroom in order to gain a full perspective of the hearing.

I was the sole public member here at this specific court, which made it seem a bit more daunting than usual. This court was probably where I had an awe moment for myself. The room was filled with marble and gold trimming everywhere. The official courtroom was carpeted with wood everywhere. The judge on duty, Honorable Alvin K. Hellerstein had not yet arrived when I was there. Outside the courtroom, counsels and attorneys are discussing and/or gossiping at the moment before the case starts. The atmosphere of this courtroom is exactly what I expected a courtroom to be like. This feeling was not met in the NY criminal and civil courts. One thing that was noticed was that there were zero court officers in the courtroom so far which seemed very odd, given the daunting nature of the whole room. The transcriber, more commonly known as the court reporter, arrived. The lack of my phone gives me no sense of time. It felt like I was there for about 5 minutes but it was more like ten to fifteen minutes had passed. There was an abnormal lack of modern feel, but certainly no lack of modern devices. The courtroom that I was in had several computers, which were equipped with some of the latest software made for them.

I visited that area 2 times within September 1st & 2nd. My first visit September 1st was at department 31 of the Court Proceedings. I walked within the courtroom at 1:30pm to find myself observing multiple convicted citizens sharing a similar action of resisting their probation of the law. Some of the probations problems mainly related to restraining orders and many other complicated matters. The court ended at 3:00pm. On the 2nd of September at 1:00pm I decided to visit department 41 of the Court Proceedings. Once the court started the judge present the case at hand. The court basically handles family emotions and schedule appointments. So throughout the court session I was listening to lots of emotional business at hand. The court ended at

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

This week our class had the opportunity to visit the Warren County Justice Center. Through this visit, I was able to learn about the varying jurisdiction, media access and technology, and security of the courts in Bowling Green, specifically the Warren County Justice Center and the US District Court in Bowling Green.