court observation

We attended the ACT Magistrates Court on 6th October 2017. We observed a criminal case.

The judge, in the movie, actually listened to the prosecutor’s witnesses and decided there was enough probable cause to move forward to a trial. Many judges are often too busy to examine the facts of the case before making a probable cause determination as stated in our text.

I attended the District Court at 201 West Picacho Ave on March 7, 2011. I sat in on judge Mike Murphy's court. Judge Murphy started court promptly at 9:00 a.m. but before I got into the court I had to wait in a long line of about 30 people. then when I finally got to the court house door I had to go through a metal detector where I had to take off my belt and shoes and everything metal on my persons. Then I asked one of the officers working the metal dictator how I could ask to sit in on a criminal court that was going on this morning. She then directed me to court room four. I asked the bailiff if it was ok for me to sit in on court today for my criminal justice class, and if the case where criminal matters. The bailiff then told me that

I observed court operations at the Plantation Key Government Center in Tavernier, Florida twice: on October 7th and November 4th. I observed Chief Circuit Judge Carlos Garcia in courtroom A. The courthouse is located in the 16th Judicial Circuit of Florida and it’s a state trial court with general jurisdiction. The first visit was cut short, in part because it was a lighter criminal day than planned, but also I was flabbergasted by the lack of professionalism that was present in this courtroom. I’m not sure if it’s a “court in Paradise” problem, or something that is observed at other courtrooms, however, I’m disappointed in what I saw. Lack of professionalism was evident during both visits from the actors and their actions in the courtroom.

My understanding of the court system has changed almost weekly from the beginning of my semester. I do understand things that I never thought I would’ve have known or even cared about in the least. The book Courtroom 302 has brought an even different side of thinking into this. The book goes into detail about the criminal court in Chicago. He watches all of the actions and different trials that come and go in the courtroom 302. He presents many different cases throughout the book which gives more insight then just a single case.

The prosecution works to get their guilty verdict while the defense tries to help their clients with their verdicts. In court I listen to both sides argue the Innocence/Guilt of the young woman in question wanted on DWI charges. The honorable judge Pauline Hankins presides over the court and waits patiently for all the evidence to be presented. The prosecution and the defense are set on opposite sides of the courtroom while the jury box and the belief are set next to the judge. Judge Pauline Hankins is in the middle of the courtroom in front of the North Carolina State seal with an office on the right next to the witness stand. Everything that has been said in the court is added to the court record. The court record is a detailed document

In the R. v. Stinchcombe case, a lawyer was charged with breach of trust, theft and fraud. His former secretary was a Crown witness at the opening of the investigation. She provided relevant evidence towards the defence. Former to trial, she was interviewed by an RCMP officer and a tape‑recorded statement was taken. Far along during the progress of the trial, she again was interviewed by a police officer with a written statement taken. The defence counsel was notified of the occurrence but not of the statements. His request for a disclosure was declined. However, throughout the trial, the defence counsel acknowledge without a doubt that the witness would not be called by the Crown and required an order that the witness be called or that the Crown disclose the main statements to the defence. The trial continued and the accused was found guilty of breach of trust and fraud. Conditional stays were entered with respect to the theft counts. The

As I entered the court, the trial has already commenced so I did not really know how a real trial started. I sat in the back where the public sits, facing the judge bench. The courtroom was cold and quiet. Especially it was very small, much smaller and less impressive than I expected.. Everyone was in formal dressing code. There were just a few number of spectators and family members in the court room. There was a clerk who was typing everything what was happening during the court time. Judge Krocker appeared to have things under control and had the proceedings moving forward smoothly. She was a very friendly lady with short blonde hair. She was listening attentively. She spoke clearly and distinctly so that everyone in the courtroom could hear. Samuel Gallegos is a white man about 5 '8 tall. He looked quite nervous while some police officers were standing behind him. From what I understood, this case was really happening back in 2014 and the suspect has criminal history relating to assault of child and another related case to this case. On my left hand side were the bailiffs while some others stood observed

Turning to the case of Guy Paul Morin, one will see that the witness account played a great deal in the conviction of Morin. Mr. X falsely testified against Morin because he did not like Morin. The crown also used evidence from undercover officers where statements of Morin were recorded on a 60 minute tape recorder, which the officers believed to be 90 minutes. This made the case interesting because the crown used this instance for saying that Morin confessed to the crime after 60 minutes. This showed false accusation that was made both by the police officers and crown attorneys.

During this documentary, the viewers get an inside look at how criminal proceedings work. In the courtroom, the most important players are the prosecution, defense, and judge. The judge is in the room to make sure the proceeding runs smoothly and to settle any arguments that arise. The prosecution is there to accuse the defendant for whatever crime he or she has been convicted of. The defense is there to defend the person being convicted of the crime. There is also a bailiff who is there to oversee the court and make sure everyone there is safe. The bailiff will bring evidence form the defense or prosecution to the judge, as nobody is to approach the bench without the judge calling attorneys to the

A jury heard evidence from the trial that lasted four days. The pharmacist and her employer

I decided to attend a night traffic court session at the Ventura Courthouse. The cases ranged from seat belt violations to reckless driving. Most of the defendants appeared before the court to request more time to pay the fines associated with the tickets. I was surprised to see that very few of the people in the courthouse were pleading not guilty. Only one person showed up to defend a case with legal help from an attorney of some sort.

I was still filled with anticipation and was quite surprised at the differences between my first and second experience. I was formally dressed and did not really blend in with anyone else sitting in the courtroom. The attorneys seemed to come and go as they pleased, with no deference or respect for the proceedings in session.

The basic division in the structure of criminal courts is between the lower criminal courts – the local courts, Children’s court and Coroner’s court – and the higher criminal courts – the District Court and the Supreme Court. In observing proceedings at the Local, District and Supreme Courts over a period of three days a number of aspects of the criminal justice system were made apparent. The administration, processes and practices of the criminal trial are extremely varied dependent upon the level of criminal court being observed. The distinctions between the workings of the two courts revealed a number of the differences between summary proceedings and trial upon indictment. The cases observed served to

ON 09-03-2016 at 0930 hours, I was notified by Sgt Kelley of an aggravated battery which occurred at 2111 Roanoke Springs Drive. I was advised to respond to St. Joseph’s Hospital (South) at 6901 Simmons Loop in Riverview. Upon my arrival, I met with Sgt. Kelley, Deputy Karpenske # 249578 and Crime Scene Tech Dewitt. There was a black 2013 Nissan Maxima bearing Florida tag, DGV F36, parked in the emergency room parking bay. I learned the suspect, Joanna Lebrea Lewis had driven the car to the hospital for treatment of the injuries sustained during the offense. It was learned that verbal consent had been obtained from both the victim and suspect to search their residence and vehicle. It was also learned the victim, Marieio Denod Spradley,