The Judicial Evolution Of Appointment Of Commissions

After observing the trial of Mr. Sanger Rainsford, many concerns arose for me. There was quite a bit of information proposed by the prosecution that seemed

The Judicial Branch is the balancing factor of the Government. It is the listener of the people of the US and it decides on all matters regarding the people. It "interprets the nation's law" (World Book 141). Being able to interpret the law gives the Judicial branch a special kind of power. One of which the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch do not possess. The Judicial branch decides when a law has been broken, to what extent, and how to punish the criminal act. And that is what makes it the strongest branch.

There is often unfair advantages in the trial process as not all members of society have the same access to legal representatives or availability of

The Third Article of the United States Constitution set up the Judicial Branch. Section One of the Article set up the Judicial Branch with “one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” It also stated that the judges in the Court can only hold office in good behavior with a compensation that is unchanging at anytime in the Court. During their time in office, that is. The Second Section of the Constitution brings to mention the fact that the power that the Judicial Branch has goes to anyone. All cases brought under the Constitution of the United States of America are seen in Court. It also talks about criminal cases having a trial by jury. This not including impeachment trials. The

According to Justice John Molloy who “began practicing law in 1946, justice was much simpler” during that time and “the judicial system was straightforward and efficient” (Molloy 12). The judges focused on the laws outlined by the

Each state within the United States of America (USA) has its own unique judicial selection process within its court system. The judicial processes vary from court to court depending on a particular state. This paper analyses these processes, the qualifications for selecting the judges and the steps for removing judges from office, as it applies in the USA states of New York and Texas.

The second part of the brief is the facts of the case. This is the summary or background that led to this particular dispute. It resembles a journalist’s report offering only the basic “who, what, where, when, how and why” of the trial and case record leading up to the present appeal. Included

When judges are appointed to the federal judiciary they must take into account the atmosphere they will be entering into (the judicial climate a judge enters). These new appointees will enter into their position where they must interact with people who have been there longer than they have. By the time these new judges enter the federal judiciary there is already an existing composition and atmosphere. They enter into the decisions already made, in which they must uphold the precedents made and constitutionality of cases or, if in the trial and appellate courts, the result may lead to the higher court overturning their decisions. When decisions are constantly being overturned it can result in a lack of legitimacy of the judge and could eventually result in impeachment, recall vote, etc.

Adversarial system – An adversarial system is a type of legal system used in the US. In this system, two parties present their cases or positions (often by way of an advocate, such as an attorney) to the court. Depending on the type of case, the presented information is interpreted by an impartial person or group of people (a judge or a jury), who then decide what the facts are and what the judgment is. The key principle of the adversarial system is the pitting of the two parties against each other in a controlled environment; these two parties are known as the prosecution and the defense.

I really agree with everything that you said in your second paragraph. In the adversarial system, everyone is given a chance to tell their side of the story. Each party also has the ability to represent the case in the most favorable light to their side. This legal system also eliminates the bias that could happen if a judge were to play a bigger role in the case like they do in the inquisitorial system. I kind of disagree with what you said about this system not producing a fair outcome. I think it produces the fairest outcome possible in most cases. This legal system is undeniable fairer than the inquisitorial system. In child custody cases I think that they would consider what's in the best interests of the child and I do think that's the

Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment

The same elements of urgency and limited available options also provide the defense privilege under the rule of law of ‘necessity’. If the defense falls under the preview of ‘public

Supporters of the adversary system believe it is the best justice system in the world to balance the rights of the individuals against the community’s expectations that people who break society’s laws will be punished.

“A commission on judicial conduct is created to be composed of eleven persons consisting of two judges of the court of appeals, two judges of the superior

Following such protocol could help in cases where classifying a person’s guilt is based on fact finding by way of fair and honest legal procedures instead of presenting facts alone. Because the rights listed in the Constitution are not simple, accountability and liability must be present for criminal justice officials and authorities. Equality and uniformity should have a place in the justice process.