The Law Of The Court System

Mr. Gideon was brought to trial without counsel and was found guilty by a jury. He was

He then knew for sure that they denied his right to have a lawyer to represent him in his case. Mr. Gideon was upset and decided to write a letter to the U.S. Supreme Court. The supreme court decided to overturn his case and give him a fair trial. He had spent 2 years in Federal prison and he went back to the same court and had the same judge. He didn’t want to have the lawyers that he had at first so he asked to extend his court date. The judge let him do that. This is the 2nd time he has been to trial for the same offense. Mr. Gideon thought that it was double jeopardy, but it wasn’t. This time he had a lawyer named, Turner. They then called Lester Wade to the stand as a witness and then he broke down, then he confessed about lying about saying he had never convicted a felony. Then the judges declared him not guilty of committing Grand Larceny and he was free. This case was important because it changed how cases in courts will be forever. Now, all people that go to court, even for misdemeanor cases. It changed the history for court cases

Did the state court's failure to appoint a lawyer for Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and due process of law as protected by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?

Gideon v. Wainwright is a Supreme Court case that occurred in 1963 which questioned the defendant’s right of the sixth amendment. If it was not for a man in his prison cell that wrote to the Supreme Court, the United States court systems would not be the same today. Clarence Gideon was arrested because he stole money from a pool hall’s vending machines. At trial he could not afford an attorney and was not appointed counsel. If it was not for Gideon who wrote to the Supreme Court petitioning his constitutional rights he would have never had the opportunity to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. Although Clarence Gideon was an uneducated and poor citizen, he still was able to petition his constitutional rights to the United States Supreme court in order to achieve a truly fair trial. He ended discrimination in the courts against the poor who cannot afford their own counsel.

The main challenge Gideon needed to overcome was the regulations instituted by the 1942 court case Betts v. Brady. Betts v. Brady established that only in special circumstances were impoverished criminals entitled to counsel. These special circumstances often required some form of mental or physical disability in which Clarence Earl Gideon did not have. The courts had to then examine if legal counsel was an essential right to due process.

Since Gideon was proceeding without funds, it gave the Justice a chance to think about the constitution. He appointed a counsel to represent him and requested both sides to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments. Should this Court’s holding in Betts v. Brady be reconsidered?”

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).

Americans depend a great deal on entertainment to educate them about life. In several ways Americans live vicariously through the actors and actresses on television and believe themselves to learn many things from those actors and actresses. For example, many people have said they learned medical techniques by watching medical shows on television or believe they would know what to do in a medical emergency because they have seen it done on television. The same goes for Americans’ knowledge about Court hearings and the judicial system. Many things are done on television by actors playing lawyers or judges that are done just for the purpose of entertainment. “Reality-based” Court shows such as Judge Judy, People’s Court

Imagine you are the director of health information services for a medium-sized health care facility. Like many of your peers, you have contracted with an outside copying service to handle all requests for release of patient health information at your facility. You have learned that a lobbying organization for trial attorneys in your state is promoting legislation to place a cap on photocopying costs, which is significantly below the actual costs incurred as part of the contract. (Case Study, p. 20)

In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled the Eighth Amendment prohibited citizens under the age of eighteen from being sentenced to life in prison without consideration of extenuating circumstances. In 1963, not even two weeks after his seventeenth birthday, Henry Montgomery murdered Charles Hurt and was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Montgomery, now sixty-nine years old, is challenging the state of Louisiana’s authority to keep him behind bars. Should he, along with many others in the same situation, be given the chance to prove himself as an upstanding citizen of the United States of America? Montgomery’s and other prisoner’s freedom hangs in the balance as the nine justices of the Supreme Court debate whether or not they should be granted collateral review.

Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.

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..

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.

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.