The Legal Process Of The United States

The complexity of the United States legal system reflects the diversity of the public it serves. Over centuries of immigration different cultures have brought old world legal customs that eventually intermixed to become the legal system under which the country now operates. While much of the influence in Law can be credited to the British Common Law system there are some defining characteristics, which are uniquely American. One of these is public prosecution, which originated in 1704 in Connecticut and was later adopted by the other colonies and, after the Revolution, the States. (Jacoby 3) These practices lead to the development of district attorneys, though this was not their original title. A district attorney is the criminal

There are some differences between a normal criminal and a criminal that suffers from a mental illness in the criminal justice system. For example one of the many fundamentals to our criminal justice system is the principle that no one can be tried or adjudged to punishment while mentally incompetent. Trials for mentally unstable people have been modified and are run by different guidelines. Unlike a regular convict, most mentally unstable convicts are unable to comprehend or are unable to complete a trial. Once a convict with a mental illness is convicted or awaiting trail their every medical need must be accommodated within the faculty and it's staff. Without the proper medical care a person with mental illness can become

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..

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.

In what ways is the indigenous justice paradigm in conflict with the principles of the traditional, adversarial American criminal justice system? In what ways do the principles of Native American justice complement more mainstream correctional initiatives?

If during all of this process no agreement or deal has been made it goes to trial. “A trail is the proceeding during which the government and the defense present evidence to prove or disprove the charges” (Victim Assistance, 2013). If the defendant chooses to have a trial by jury than the jury selection process begins. “Twelve jurors are selected randomly from the jury pool, a list of potential jurors compiled from voter registration records of people living in the district” (Steps in the Federal Criminal Process, 2015). An ideal jury should consist of all types of people from different races and cultures (Steps in the Federal Criminal Process, 2015). Each attorney asks each potential jury member questions about their prejudices to help them decide whether or not they want them on the jury (Steps in the Federal Criminal Process, 2015). The judge is there to make sure that the attorneys are fair with their questions, and that the jury selection ends up fair and impartial.

Court and process: Constitutional Court ruled that the law is the prerogative of the federalism, not only reconciliation state governments. The state of government did not agree that would be their responsibility for repaid Mr. Barron. The chief justice John Marshall thought that this is not the states problem, and there is nothing to do in the side of the city of Baltimore. Mr. Barron insists that is in the faith amendment and it should be until the bill of right of the state government, and the federal government were unsure of the faith amendment was so clear. However, after the civil war the state of government made the fourth amendment that the state can’t take any bill of rights from the citizen.

“The court finds you guilty on all accounts. You are sentenced to 35 years in federal prison. Court dismissed.” If only justice in America was the same as a hollywood movie, where, in the end, each and every person put on trial receives a true and just verdict. It would be nice if America’s justice system was designed so that “you couldn’t be the next victim of corruption - innocent and sent to prison, or strapped to a table and put to death; or robbed of your life savings by American lawyers” (Sachs, America’s Corrupt Legal). Welcome to the new America, where all it takes is pockets as deep as the Pacific Ocean to be innocent and poverty to be found guilty, thrown in jail, and not given a second thought. Although America often prides itself on its just ways of governing and dealing with potential criminals, the justice system is often corrupted because of social issues, ethical issues, corrupt officials, and control of the press.

The case continues with the court system, which weighs the evidence to determine if the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If deemed guilty, the accused will be sentenced and remanded to the corrections component. The corrections system will use the means at their disposal, namely incarceration and probation, to punish and correct the behavior of the offender. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2010).

The Supreme court once handled a criminal trial? Today, the mere mention of lynching evokes negative reactions from people, but in the past not so much. If you were a person of color, you feared lynching because laws were either not enforced or did not exist to protect you from that disgusting method of death. I want to examine the history of the court case, United States v. Shipp (1906), to give one account of the American legal process eked a victory for African-Americans. The Supreme Court case is notable because the legal process brought few victories for Blacks in the late/early 20th century America. For example, the thought of a Black man causing harm to a white woman was fatally unforgivable and some were lynched by the public, regardless of their innocence. In the case of Ed Johnson of Tennessee, he met that same fate; his sixth amendment rights were violated in the process. He was a citizen of the United States, and guaranteed the same rights as anyone else living in the country.

While we must have due processes in place, we must make these processes smoother and not be so rigorous. Also for immigrants already taking part in our system not only should they be afforded equal rights to natural citizens but should be afforded citizenship as well. Most immigrants who do try an enter the country the correct way know it may take years before citizenship is granted to you and in some cases I’ve heard it taking up to 10 years. Although the due process is a necessary evil, most immigrants are coming from third world countries or conditions so extreme they are forced to flee to America. So why have we yet to allocate the resources to government branches to give them the staffing needed and resources to process these applications in a timely matter? For one

The decisions of state courts across the nation vary regarding the independent nature of the state judicial branch, and the different tiers of courts, trial, and the appellate. The selection of judges, the removal of judges and the issue covering caseload among other reforms are comparable across all states courts. In NY, the structure of the court system is similar to trials court and appeals courts (Pecorella and Stonecash 178). Bowman suggests more efficiently manage the caseload and political influence in the judiciary (Bowman 193-4). According to Bowman, state trial courts amounts to more than 100 million new cases each year (Bowman 225). The case load in NY’s eleven trial courts is one of the busiest in the nation's court system (Pecorella and Stonecash 171).

United Stat Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution gives that "[t]he legal Power of the United States, might be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such second rate Courts as the Congress might now and again appoint and set up." Under this area and the Judiciary Act of 1789, the United States Supreme Court was made. The Act composed the Supreme Court, the government circuit courts and the elected region courts, set up the Office of the Attorney General, and claimed the president 's authority to select judges for arrangement to the United States Supreme Court with the exhortation and assent of the Senate.

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.