1. Explain the doctrine of precedent and how it operates within a criminal court hierarchy. (3 marks)
The doctrine of precedent is the principle in which judges’ follow when deciding the results of cases. This principle ensures that the law is applied consistently across matters, sometimes applying past reasoning from similar cases. Some courts are bound to follow the doctrine of precedents if a similar case was tried in a higher court. Generally, the High Court of Australia has precedence over all courts (Federal, Supreme, District, Local etc.) and is not bound to follow the decisions made in these lower courts.
2. Briefly describe the following court hearings and explain their main purpose:
a) A jury trial
Jury trials are held in District or Supreme Courts. These trials are used to ensure that people that are not influenced by the government and power can have their say in the verdict of a defendant. The jury is a selection of people that are chosen to attend a case and listen to evidence to make determinations on questions of fact. The judge then takes the jury’s decision into account when deciding the defendant’s verdict.
b) A committal hearing
Committal hearings are only held for some indictable offences (such as manslaughter or aggravated burglary). P. Salmelainen (1992) suggests that committal hearings are used to determine whether there is enough evidence to warrant the accused being sent to stand trial. These hearings are often held in local courts until the
A jury is a person who is un-qualified and not paid who is selected at random to participate in the court hearing. To be
The jury system of a trial is an essential element of the democratic process. It attempts to secure fairness in the justice system. Traditionally, the jury system has been viewed as a cornerstone of common law procedure. However, the use of the system of trial by jury is on the decline. Today, its use differs, depending on whether (a) it is a civil or criminal matter, and (b) in criminal matters, whether it is a summary or an indictable offence.
In considering the effectiveness of the jury system, it is first necessary to understand the roles of juries. Primarily, a jury is a body of legally unqualified citizens who agree on a verdict based on evidence
Every day people are convicted of crimes or arrested for other reasons. Once they are convicted they are summoned to court, this begins the jury process. Citizens are randomly chosen to serve on jury duty. The citizens on the jury will use the jury system to determine if the person being accused is guilty or innocent. Trials can become very long or they can be short it just depends on the topic and how long it takes to decide on what the consequences will be. The jury system is the main trial and the main decision of whether or not someone is right or wrong.
D. Explain how each of the following influences decisions made by individual justices when deciding cases heard by the courts.
In America we have an Adversary System of Justice, which means that criminal trials proceed under the adversary theory of justice to arrive at the truth in a given case. One characteristic of this system is intensive cross-examination of both defense and prosecution witnesses. In a jury trial, it is for the jury, which observes these witnesses, to weigh the evidence and make the ultimate decision in every case—guilty or not guilty. However, not every case makes it to trial in fact, about 80% of defendants plead guilty allowing them to just be sentenced and not have to go through the whole process of a trial. Other cases are dropped, or dismissed if the prosecutor, or in some cases a grand jury, feels that there is insufficient evidence to carry on. Some defendants are sent to diversion programs, these individuals are often sent here because an official involved in the case believes that there is a better way to deal with a defendant than to prosecute them.
Is where a magistrate will hear the prosecution’s evidence and decide if it sufficient enough to send the accused to the District or Supreme Court for trial.
The rules of precedent themselves are judge made, except where a statute has intervened. Occasionally, judges have to decide on a case where there is
Juries are a crucial and irreplaceable part of the American justice system. The jury system has been around for hundreds of years. Our founding fathers viewed jury service as a critical part of democracy and self government. Twelve ordinary citizens make up the jury and will form a decision about the case. The jury system is still needed in the twenty-first century because it ensures the accused gets a fair trial and it promotes civic participation.
Correct! This is the practice of using a case that has already been decided in a court of law (the precedent) as an analog or analogy to the case in question. If the case in question is sufficiently similar to the precedent, and the precedent stands on the authority of the court's ruling, then it may be argued, by analogy, that the case in question should receive the same ruling.
A jury trial is made up of twelve citizens of the community who have been randomly selected to serve on the jury. The jury had been given the authority to judge the facts of the case, and them apply the law that was given by the judge to those facts, and render a verdict of guilty or not guilty.
Precedent- A legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.
A jury is a group of 12 people aged between 18 and 70 who have been randomly selected from the electoral roll. Juries are only used for indictable criminal offences, these cases are held in either the District or Supreme court.
It's referring to precedents. Precedents are previous decisions of the court that need to be followed by courts in the same or lower in the hierarchy. The court must give consideration but there is no rule on how it should apply it to the facts of the case at hand.
Time-saving. Where principles have been established, cases with familiar facts are unlikely to go through a lengthy process of litigation. The main disadvantages of the doctrine of judicial precedent are; -