Afterwards the arraignment is opened in court to make sure the defendant has a copy of their indictment, after the indictment is read and the defendant is asked to give a plea whether guilty or not guilty. A this time the defendant can waive his appearance for the arraignment if signed by both the defendant and the counsel. The written waiver is signed by both affirming that the defendant received a copy of the indictment stating the plea is not guilty, and the court has to accept the signed
Appellate Jurisdiction is the ability to review the transcripts of trial courts and see if they may have made an error in their decision. The appellate decision questions the law not the facts. Question 3 (pg. 65) Q: Identify and define the alternative tools of discovery. A: Interrogatories are questions that attorneys work with the clients to answer and are sent and answered under oath from one party to another.
Criminal Justice Ethics Simulation 1. My first chose in decision 1. Would be to challenge my partner about how he conducted the interview. Although, my partner might have strong beliefs that the two offenders committed the crime he was justified in how he went about properly conducting the interview. First, he broke the department policy by not video recording the interview which was essential to built a solid case if they had confess in which he claimed the two did.
If bail has not previously been set, it is often set at the same time as the arraignment. Bail (or "bond") is often granted in a standard amount, depending upon the crime charged. In civil trials, one person or party has reached the conclusion that their outstanding disagreement or dispute with another individual or entity can no longer be resolved through informal damage plea bargaining without the intervention of the judicial system and a civil trial. To initiate the process of a civil trial, individuals are required to file a complaint within the court of appropriate jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is determined by assessing whether the court receiving the complaint has power over a defendant and whether the property involved in a dispute is within the given jurisdiction.
For example, it can be used in cases where a person is being held without charges, or when due process obviously has been denied, bail is excessive, parole has been granted, an accused has been improperly surrendered by the bail bondsman, or probation has been summarily terminated without cause. A particularly frequent use of habeas writs is by convicted prisoners arguing that the trial attorney failed to prepare the defense and was incompetent. Prisoners sentenced to death also file habeas petitions challenging the constitutionality of the state death penalty law. Note that habeas writs are different from and do not replace appeals, which are arguments for reversal of a conviction based on claims that the judge conducted the trial improperly. Often, convicted prisoners file both.
With the defendant they get a shot at leniency from the judge. Then there are some that say plea bargaining is unconstitutional. “Plea bargaining rests on the constitutional fiction that our government does not retaliate against individuals who wish to exercise their right to trial by jury.” (Lynch, The Case Against Plea Bargaining, 2003). essentially this means if the defendant believes in their innocence and want to go to trial the will be punished for standing up for their constitutional rights. It is my belief that plea bargaining is an utter necessity, and though it may not seem just at all times; we as a society can see how hectic the court would be if all cases were brought to trial.
After the Norman Conquest the jury system was imported to Britain. The jurors acted as witnesses and provided information about local matters, then, under Henry II, they began to deliberate on evidence produced by the parties. The judges would usually try to force the juries into convicting the defendants but in Bushell’s case (1670) the jury had the right to give a verdict accordingly to their conscience. In case R v Wang (2005) the judge directed the jury that they had to convict but the House of Lords said that it was wrong of the judge and they allowed Mr. Wang’s appeal. It is the jury to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty.
Malcolm’s path in life was abruptly challenged when he went to prison, yet he harnessed the forces within himself to triumph his misfortune. Now I didn't go to prison, but I was confronted with a catastrophe that nearly devoured me. I was suddenly confronted with the law and being accused of a crime I did not commit. I was humanly furious because the law was suddenly being used as a word against me. During the proceedings, I was terror-stricken because I didn’t know how to properly address a court and I couldn’t afford an Attorney to speak on my behalf.
Judges also deal with the issue of bail once established that there is enough evidence to hold a criminal trial against the defendant during the preliminary hearing. Judges decide on whether to grant bail, and if so at what amount and on what conditions. If any of the conditions are broken by the defendant, the judge can also revoke bail and issue a warrant for his or her arrest. Once the criminal or civil trial has begun, the judge presides over the courtroom (Meyer & Grant, 2003). When the jury reaches a verdict of guilty, the judge is responsible for following established legal guidelines during sentencing.
First you have the Prosecution. The responsibility of the prosecution is to prove that without a shadow of a doubt that the defendant committed the crime. Im sure there are times that the prosecution does not think the defendant is not guilty but it is there moral right to keep the trial going and prove their case. It has got to be difficult for the prosecution to know that because of the case they have built against a person could decide the rest of their life. Lets get to the Defense.