The Role Of Errors In The Texas Criminal Justice System

In the juvenile justice system there are many different areas of need. Many juveniles to this date have struggled in the court system. For example: Competence to stand trial in a juvenile court, psychiatric/mental disorders, sexual abuse/assault, diminished cognitive abilities, and severe learning disabilities (Jones, 2003). The three that this paper will be focusing on are CST, MHS, and sexual abuse/assault (Jones, 2003). Forensic evaluations help not only the courts and attorneys to better advocate for those clients in need but also help to give attorneys a better understanding and communication process with their clients. This is a positive solution for the attorney to be able to do a better job (Jones, 2003).

During the period of the Great Depression (1920-1939), the criminal justice system reflected the same amount of struggle as the economy. At this point in America, there were many flaws within the structure of the criminal justice system. Inequality, developing system, and harsh realities of organized crime beat down the structure and credibility within trials. The need for reformation was evident. Minorities during this time period struggled overall for the same equal rights that the white majority was granted. African Americans were most called out on due to the fact they represent a different background, culture and have a unilateral political viewpoint. Although under the influence of the law, it was no different in court, when it came

With the number of DNA exonerations growing in the recent years, wrongful convictions reveal disturbing trends and fissures in the justice system. It shows how broken the system is, and why it needs urgent fixing. According to Huff (1996), over ten thousand people are convicted wrongfully for serious crimes each year. This study established that factors leading to wrongful convictions are false eyewitnesses, a prejudiced jury, incompetent prosecutors, and suspects’ ignorance. Where DNA evidence clears a suspect, array of reasons emerge; misconduct, mistakes, to race and class factors. It is important to make DNA data available to attorneys in order to enable them mount a strong

Abstract: Over the past twenty years, advancement in DNA technology has directly led to the exoneration of nearly 300 people in the United States. In addition to these scientific advancements, a growing body of literature has focused on the significant roles eyewitness misidentification, so-called “jailhouse snitches,” and false confessions have played in contributing to wrongful convictions in U.S. courts. The aim of this paper is to examine the occurrence of wrongful conviction in criminal trials and the effect of DNA testing on bringing attention to the alarming frequency of these unjust judicial outcomes. Through an examination of previous wrongful conviction research and appellate court rulings, this paper will also explore the extent to which permitting wrongful convictions to be upheld constitutes a violation of civil liberties. Finally, this paper will discuss an important contradiction that advancements in science have exposed within our criminal justice system; while DNA technology and other advanced forensic techniques are increasingly being relied upon to secure criminal convictions, the justice system seems to be correspondingly reluctant to consider these forms of evidence for the

Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based

The U.S. Department of Justice is responsible for enforcing federal laws and administrating justice systems in the United States. However, the U.S. Department of Justice has a criminal justice system that is not fair for everyone in the country, specifically for those who are mentally ill, or poor. Over the past couple of years in the United States, there have been many innocent people wrongfully convicted and put on death row due to the corruption of the government. The main factor that has been identify as the cause of wrongful convictions is eyewitness misidentification. The Bedau and Radelet’s study demostrates that there are around 350 wrongful convictions in capital cases. Many abolitionists have arisen against capital punishments, since the exponential increase of exonerations based on DNA or non-DNA evidence. Their goal is to improve the current methods performed by our criminal justice system. The U.S. Department of Justice has acknowledged that its current criminal justice system is not being very effective in punishing the guilty. Since there have been many cases of wrongful convictions, many people are starting to question what has been the improvements that the U.S. Department of Justice has make in order to prevent false imprisonment and death penalty of innocent people. The Department of Justice has tried to decrease the number of inmates who were wrongly put on death row by improving prosecutorial accountability, by researching past criminal cases, and by

Of the 121 participants, three primary areas were measured, whether or not the participant found the defendant guilty or not, to what degree the participant found the defendant guilty on a 1 to 7 scale, and the severity of punishment the participant thought the defendant should receive with 5 choices. This was done by the use of four different surveys, a black discredited witness, a white discredited witness, a black witness, and a white witness. Descriptives were done on guilt rating (M = 4.55, SD = 1.539) and punishment rating (M = 2.43, SD = 1.255). Then the descriptives were broken down even more into four categories for each dependent variable in regards to the independent variables, credible witness guilt rating (M = 4.88) and

The American Criminal Justice system is arguably one of the most fair systems in the world. However, like anything it has its flaws. There are many flaws but the largest three, in my opinion, would be the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any other country, the high penalties for drug users, as well as the jury system. The high incarceration rates and the penalties for drug users affect each other but they are still issues on their own. In fact, many of issues within our system coincide within each other.

The United States Criminal Justice System is an extremely complex, but yet extremely important part of the United States. The criminal justice system is defined as “the set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws). Although there are many different groups of people that make up the criminal justice system, the two main and most discussed the state division or the federal division. The state division of the criminal justice system deals with crimes that are committed within any given states boundaries. The federal division of the criminal justice system deals with crimes that are committed on property owned by the government, or if a crime is committed in multiple states.

A paper published on Hoftra Law’s website claims that only six percent of cases involved prosecutorial misconduct as a predominant factor resulting in wrongful convictions. This suggests the bulk of the problem may begin with police and investigators who are the first responders to arrive on-scene. The desire to close a case often trumps aggressive and coercive tactics that are widely endorsed in the law enforcement community. Sadly, this leads to false confessions. In a third of all exonerated cases, evidence has shown there was no crime ever committed. Furthermore, in 16 percent of exoneration cases, the defendants finally pleaded guilty after being worn down and illegally interrogated by law enforcement officials. Reporter Zusha Eilson states that “Thirty-eight percent of exonerations for crimes allegedly committed by youth under 18 in the last quarter century involved false confessions.” (www.journalistresource.org) Flawed forensic work and tampering of evidence, including inaccurate collection of evidence at crime scenes is another issue on the investigation front that contributes to false

In 1992, Roy Brown was convicted of the death of another individual. The victim was fond beaten, strangled, and stabbed at her farmhouse. She was a social worker and was found covered in bite marks and saliva was obtained as DNA evidence. Mr. Brown served 15 years in prison before he was able to prove himself innocent from his cell with the assistance of the Innocence Project. A similar case occurred in 1989, Steven Barnes was convicted of the murder and rape of a 16 year old girl. The victim was found raped and strangled to death on a dirt road. His truck implied him to be a suspect. Even though there was a great amount of statements that supported his alibi, three years after the crime occurred, Mr. Barnes served 20 years in prison before being freed by the Innocence Project.

Texas is known for some terrible things, but few are as bad as our penchant for sentencing innocent people to death. Advances in forensic science (like using science) have helped exonerate at least 48 people in Texas since 2001, when a law made it easier for defendants to request post-conviction DNA testing. Study of DNA exoneration cases has shown the fallibility of other, less scientific types of evidence, like “snitch” testimony provided by alleged accomplices or jailhouse informants.

The conviction of innocent people is perhaps the worst nightmare of a criminal justice system. sending someone to jail for a crime that he has not committed, without the system having been able to discriminate effectively against the author, is one of the main mistakes that can be committed and with very serious consequences for the life of the affected person and their environment, which can hardly be repaired with subsequent economic compensation. Unfortunately, comparative experience shows us that there is no criminal justice system immune to the possibility of making mistakes of this kind. On the contrary, in recent years, investigations have been carried out in several countries that show the enormous fallibility of criminal justice systems.

Among those sentenced to capital punishment, though, the rate of conviction is far higher than for any other category of criminal conviction. Less than one-tenth of 1% of convictions in our country are death sentences, yet they account for a shockingly high number of exonerations. Approximately 12% of known exonerations of innocent defendants from 1989 through early 2012 were of those on death row. One main reason for this high exoneration rate among capital cases is that far more resources and attention are devoted to death penalty cases, both before and after conviction, than to other criminal prosecutions. Almost all capital convictions are decided by a jury trial, and in the small number of capital cases where defendants plead guilty they

When most people hear the term, “corrections” they probably think of prisons, striped uniforms, cellblocks, armed guards, and surly prisoners. Part of American corrections is prisons, but corrections is much more than that. Corrections includes prisons, jails, halfway houses, group homes, probation, parole, intensive supervision, electric monitoring, restitution programs, victim-offender mediation, and even the death penalty. Corrections can be defined as all that society does to and with offenders after they have been found guilty of a crime. Corrections even includes some things done to offenders prior to conviction, such as detention in jails pending adjudication of guilt and programs for offenders who are diverted out of the criminal system. I will start this paper by exploring early corrections in the United States.