Criminal Procedure Policy Savannah Slorp CJA/353 August 23, 2010 Mr. Krauser Abstract Criminal procedures are safeguards against the indiscriminate application of criminal laws and the wanton treatment of suspected criminals. Specifically, they are designed to enforce the constitutional rights of criminal suspects and defendants, beginning with initial police contact and continuing through arrest, investigation, trial, sentencing, and appeals. The main constitutional provisions regarding criminal procedure can be found in Amendments IV, V, VI, and XIV to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court for the first time began to extend the protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights to exercises of power by state and local governments.
References JEAN RIMBACHEmail: "2 RETURN TO COUNTY COPS AFTER ACQUITTAL." Record (Bergen County, NJ). 2014, June 07: L1.
The Criminal Trial: Trail Process: From Jury Selection to Sentencing Introduction 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.Â 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)
Darlene E.B Hines Professor Hudson BUSI 301 Fall September 22, 2013 Courtroom Observation: 2008 1L Moot Court Tournament at the Liberty University School of Law, White V. Gibbs CA# -8776-CV285.
History on Trial, written by Gary B. Nash, Charlotte Crabtree, and Ross E. Dunn, explains the events circulating the release of the National History Standards in 1994. This book follows their trials and tribulations after releasing the standards. It discusses the critics' harsh responses to the standards. These responses led to a media war over history and how it should be taught in American schools. The book, being written by them, offers the creators of the standards point of view. With that said, the book is biased. The book is a great source that shows exactly what the Gary Nash, Charlotte Crabtree and Ross Dunn felt during the media war, but it does not give the critics point of view. It paints the critics as rash and stubborn Americans
The courtroom work group consists of individuals who work together to successfully prosecute a case, such as criminal prosecutors, criminal defense attorneys, and probation officers. The courtroom work group, then, carries the case through the justice system to its logical conclusion dismissal, conviction, and failure to convict. Although the public is set to believe that the judge makes all the principal decisions in the court, he or she normally accepts bail recommendations from prosecutors, plea-bargains from defense attorneys, and sentence recommendations from probation officers. Defense attorneys, private or appointed, ensure that the defendant's rights are protected and they are to defend their client throughout all criminal proceedings.
Issues Related to the Steps a Criminal Defendant may go through As Mr. Crook's lawyer, explain the advice you will give him both pre-arrest and post-arrest.
This article talked about the differences between punishments handed out to smiling verses nonsmiling defendants. The study found that a smiling verse nonsmiling defendant had more effects on male juror’s punishment decisions than it did female jurors. This is because a smiling face increases a person’s level of attractiveness. It also found that there were some effects produced by physical attractiveness and a smile when it comes to determining guilt and punishment. The study’s results especially found significant relationships between defendants who were rated unattractive and who were not smiling. According to the article it was much more common for a guilty and unattractive defendant who was smiling to receive leniency in punishment then the guilty attractive defendant who was smiling. However, the results found that men where the ones who were more lenient with the punishment of smiling defendants especially if the defendant was a woman.
Identify the steps involved in the pretrial criminal process Once the person has been arrested he/she appears in court in order to determined by the court if the person is guilty or not. The defendant is made aware of their legal rights and if they are found not guilty during the initial appearance no further action is needed. However, if the defendant is found guilty then he/she either is released on a bail bond or kept in detention depending on the seriousness of the crime till the trail takes place.
I completely agree with Kesha that this is in fact an incredibly complex case because the criminal trial was never truly concentrated for the justice of the crime. It was a trial about racism, trial about the credibility of the police, about whether simpson was dreamed anything but the actual crime. The horrific murders of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman were left behind, forgotten. Everyone jumped on the soap opera train as if this trial was a reality show, and I could not even begin to imagine the families of the victim’s pain. Kesha also raised many good questions that I myself have asked while following both the civil and criminal trial. I do have some theories that may not explain the motive but may explain why things turned corrupt the
Humans are wired to have dreams and goals, some give up during their path and others refuse to lose and do anything to get to the finish line. Throughout history, this willpower is commonly seen within people who have resources and want to take over something they have no control of. The mood throughout the monologue is personal and strong. Many of his sentences are short and too the point to keep the jury attentive.
There are 5 general elements of crimes. Those are mens rea, the act, the concurrence principle, harm and causation (Brody and Acker, 2010).
The due process and crime control models, both created by Stanford University law professor Herbert Packer, represents two opposing method of principles functioning within criminal justice system. Although the models describe the important facets of the politics and practice of criminal justice, both have been criticized since presented by Packer in 1964. Presently both models are acknowledged as imperfect standards to explain the politics and law of criminal justice. The crime control ideal represents traditional principles, whereas the due process belief reflects moderate values; therefore generating conflict evident throughout the years. This paper discusses models, crime control and due process, and how each affects the criminal
During a trial, there are many rules, procedures, and codes of conduct that must be observed. These are in place to allow a trial to proceed more efficiently and fairly for both the defense and prosecution. According to one author, “Police, prosecutors, and criminal court Judges see too much crime, so they tend to see crime everywhere. We need rules to control their conduct, Judges to carefully apply those rules, and other Judges to review those decisions (law-article.net).” Courtroom procedures are important because, without them, defendants and prosecution alike could be treated unfairly. These procedures give a standard format for trials that must be followed to ensure that all parties have an equal opportunity to present their
For my observation, I chose to observe a civil case that had to do with a divorce. I did some research on the cases, and chose one that was similar to an experience I went through. My parents are currently separated, and my father simply refused to pay child support. He lives outside of the state, so it was hard for my mother to have face to face confrontation with him. She got tired of raising three kids on her own, and finally decided to take him to court. I was required to serve as a witness. This took place in 2009, so I was thirteen years old and didn’t really understand much of what was going on. I timidly walked to the stand and was sworn in. I then answered the questions the attorney asked me.