Problem Solving Courts In The State Court System

Imagine someone close that’s lived the straight and narrow to get where they are at. They are not perfect, maybe they could have put a little more time into their assignment at work or held their temper towards the grandpa driving too slow in front of them, but they’re just human living life the best way they know how. When a not-so-freak accident occurs and they find themselves behind bars imprisoned for the rest of their life. Sounds like the plot to “Shawshank Redemption” right? At this very instance, this story is being told of ordinary citizens behind the curtains of the New York Court System in rapidly increasing numbers. What may seem like an isolated incident is part of an ever-growing

Walter Chaplinsky, was utilizing an open spot to disperse leaflets against a specific religion. After a vast group obstructed the street and made a scene. Chaplinsky was captured by the police. The town marshal who had cautioned him already additionally met him and Chaplinsky called him “a damned Fascist” and a " god-damned racketeer " (Dorf & Michael, n,d).

Court History and Purpose. The courts are a critical component of American criminal justice because they determine what should happen to people charged with violating the law. Courts are important beyond criminal justice, too. Disputes that arise between private parties, businesses, government officials, and the like are brought to court in order to ensure that they are heard, ideally, in a neutral forum (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2011). Succeeding in liberation and independence is difficult within the world and as simple as legally right and legally wrong. Courts emphasize on the power of the state and the legitimate use of force and protect people against the random use of legislative authority. The tension among the general

The courts play a huge role in the criminal justice system. The dual court system of the United States (U.S.) was established through the U.S. constitution. The court systems have a multiple purposes and elements of court. Federal and state court system is what makes up the dual court system of the U.S. Today the U.S. court system is what it is today because of previous legal codes, common law, and the precedent it played in the past. Making the U.S. court system a vital role in the criminal justice system..

The Canadian court system, like anything made by man, has flaws. One of these flaws is the wrongful conviction of many men and women like David Milgaard and Steven Truscott. These innocent men spent years of their life behind bars because of the court system, serving the sentence for a crime they did not commit.

The Federal court system and the California court system has similar structures that can be viewed as a three-layer pyramid. For example, on the very top of the pyramid in regards to the federal court system there is the United States Supreme court. Secondly, in the middle of the pyramid there is the United States Court of Appeals. Lastly, on the very bottom of the pyramid is the United States District Courts. On the other end, California’s highest court is known as the Supreme court. In the center of the pyramid for California is known as Court of Appeals. Lastly, at the very bottom of the courts for California is known as the Superior Court. In contrast, the difference is the very bottom of the pyramid where the Federal court

the most common, and are the ones people are used to seeing and hearing about. Trial courts

There are two kinds of court in this country. The two courts are state and federal. In this essay I️ will be briefing you on the things that they have in common and the things they don’t have in common such as behavior in the court and the way they handle the state court room.

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. 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)

The United States district courts are the general trial courts for the United States. In the district courts both civil and criminal cases are filed in. Each state has at least one district court in it but there could be more than just one. All of the district courts in the United States lie within the boundary of a single jurisdiction. The district courts can be divided into four different types of categories. Those categories are civil, criminal, juvenile, and magistrate. Civil cases are things that involve divorces, child custody, child support or anything that is 25,000 dollars or less. Most criminal cases involve misdemeanors or are less serious crimes and those cases usually do not have a jury with them. Juvenile cases involve those who

I believe that one of the best reforms to our justice system is the growing number of Problem-Solving Courts. Problem-Solving Courts are specialized courts that focus on specific problems in society, such as drug abuse, prostitution, mental-health, domestic violence, etc (Courts). I have chosen drug courts more specifically to research. According to drugpolicy.org, in 2012 1.55 million people were arrested for non-violent drug charges (Drug Policy Alliance). This is an astounding amount of people being arrested, which is why I believe it is important to have problem-solving courts. Unlike traditional courts, these specialized courts address the issues that individuals have that cause them to commit crimes in order to reduce the chances of

The State of Texas should continue electing state-level judges in partisan elections instead of being appointed by the governor with approval of the Texas Senate. The most popular method of selecting state-level judges is the assisted appointment, where a nominating committee of both lawyers and non-lawyers review the applications of individuals wanting the position. This committee then gives their list of the top candidates to the governor, and the governor then chooses from that list. In my opinion, this would be the best method of selecting state-level judges as each candidate is reviewed in a committee chosen by the state bar/executive branch. This helps promote the best candidates being chosen. However, given the two choices, elections

All of these issues are handled within the judicial system, but depending on the issue, will be handled at different levels. As noted above, there are different levels in the hierarchy of the U. S. judicial system. These courts have separate and unique structures between the federal and state level. The federal court system is broken down between trial courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court (Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 2010). This is very similar to the structure of the California state court system, which also has trial courts, appellate courts, and the State Supreme Court (Judicial Council of California, 2016). The difference between the two is in jurisdiction. The federal court system is very limited in that they can only hear matters involving federal law, disputes among states, disputes involving diversity of citizenship, and disputes where the United States itself is named as a party (Reed et al., 2016). While the federal system is significantly limited in its jurisdiction, California trial courts, or Superior Courts, are courts of general jurisdiction, and can hear civil, criminal, family, probate, mental health, juvenile, and traffic matters arising within the State of California (Judicial Council of California,

The United States court system is the institution were all the legal disputes in the american society are carryed out and resolved. However, one single court is not enough to resolve every single dispute in society and that is why the court system is made up of two different courts, the federal courts and the state courts. Moreover, the federal and state courts are made up of several divisions made to handle legal disputes differently depending on its seriousness. For example, the state court is made up of trial courts of limited jurisdiction and probate courts were cases and disputes originate and then move up to trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate apellate courts, and courts of last resort respectively depending on the case.In contrast, the federal court consists of district courts, territorial coutrs, tax court, court of international trade, claims court, court of veterans appeals, an courts of military review which then move on to courts of appeals respectively and may ultimately end up in the United States supreme court. In addition, cases from state court may also appeal into the federal court system but not the other way around.

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.