With a guilty plea the process shifts the focus from the jury and judge to the prosecutor and defence counsel. It expected by the public for the truth to be discovered through the fact finding trial process. In practice plea bargaining may prevent a public finding of the facts and substitute a behind the scenes cut short plea bargaining process that fashions an offence that may or may not be supported by the evidence and this also determines the variety of penalties available to the court and limits the discussion of the evidence (Palermo et al, 1998). Plea bargaining is a notion which is well known and generally used and accepted in the United States. This usually consists of a deal being made between the prosecutor and the defence an example of plea bargaining is when the prosecution offers to drop a more serious charge against the accused in exchange for guilty plea of a lesser charge and the
The Bill of Rights Introduction to Criminal Justice March 3, 2013 There are many legal rights that we have during a trial. This Bill of Rights provides certain rights to criminal defendants during trial. There are two aspects of the U.S. criminal justice system and they are the defendant is innocent until the prosecution can prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (NOLO: Law for All, 2013). Defendants have many other rights and here they will be discussed. The right to confront witnesses is stated that in the sixth amendment “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witness against him.” They are allowed to participate in the accused’s trial process.
Lay Judges are picked just like jury trial are in America. They are regular citizens being given the same rights as a judge in America to determine the innocence or guilt of a criminal. With this new system in place the countries case have dropped by 120 previously they handled 258 case which dropped down to 138. In America mostly all case are seen not afraid of consequences of losing due to incompetent officials. Japans prosecutor are reluctant to have cases seen by Lay Judges so they don’t bring a lot of cases to them.
Prosecutorial Discretion Prosecutors play very important roles in the courtroom. Prosecutors are granted the right by the courts to have discretion upon a case. Although, prosecutors are obligated to execute the law at both federal and state levels, they still hold the discretion of what charges to try and convict the defendant on. Prosecutors have a wide range of authority in the courts; therefore, the active prosecutor(s) must efficiently analyze any evidence being presented in a case in order to determine if the case will be strong enough to withhold a trial or even if the accused defendant is chargeable. In the case of Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978), the court stated, “so long as the prosecutor has probable cause to believe that the accused committed an offense defined by statute, the decision whether or not to prosecute, and what charge to file or bring before a grand jury, generally rests entirely in his discretion.” Although there are many factors that come into play when a prosecutor is considering dismissing a case, the most prominent issues are state and federal resources, time, and investigative teams.
It is important to acknowledge that it takes all of these participants to be active in order for the United States legal system to work efficiently. The Judge-The judge presides over the trial from a desk, called a bench, on an elevated platform. The judge has five basic tasks. The first is simply to preside over the proceedings and see that order is maintained. The second is to determine whether any of the evidence that the parties want to use is illegal or improper.
A prosecutor presents evidence to prove that the defendant is guilty of the crime and the defense attorney tries to prove that the defendant is not guilty. They ensure that the defendant’s side of the story is heard, counteracts overcharging by the prosecution, and to supply their client with the best defense possible including: “providing legal counsel to client, arguing for legal innocence (not necessarily factual innocence), searching out violations of the defendant’s rights, and arguing for reduced penalties in some cases” (Meyer & Grant, p. 144). A prosecutor is paid by the state and cannot be hired, like a defense attorney, by an individual. They are hired by the public to punish those who commit crimes, in order to
Allen Charge-In criminal law, an instruction given by a judge to encourage a deadlocked jury to make a renewed effort to reach a verdict. Named after Allen v. United States (1896). attorney-client privilege- is a legal concept that protects certain communications between a client and his or her attorney and keeps those communications confidential.The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications. [1] The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality the privilege encourages clients to make "full and frank" disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation. A bench trial is a trial[->0] held before
Courtroom Standards Analysis July 30th, 2012 CJA/484 Criminal Justice Administration Capstone David Mailloux Courtroom Standards The courtroom is made up of individuals that are aware of the law to a point and that can make decisions on putting an accused offender away for a criminal act he or she has committed. These individuals consist of judges, attorneys, victims, the accused, and other courtroom personnel. This paper will go over each type of individual involved in a courtroom setting and his or her role. Judges and Witnesses Judges have many responsibilities such as interpreting the law, taking in evidence throughout the case; judges also determine how the hearing and trials unfold while in the courtroom. A judge has five basic tasks, first making sure that order is maintained throughout the courtroom and throughout the trial.
If a jury fails or refuses to convict a defendant in a criminal trial even though there if proof of guilt, jury nullification takes place. This is because the jury believes the law is being biased or unjust. If jury nullification is used in an honest and appropriate manner, it is likely to favor minorities in the courtroom in terms of sentencing for the crime committed as opposed to it being based on race. Most people that are picked to be on a jury do not know about jury nullification. A jury, juror, or judge can nullify a case in almost any
Jury Nullification Angie Coterill CJA/344 Cultural Diversity in Criminal Justice February 27, 2013 LaTraci Spotwood, Instructor Jury Nullification Jury nullification, according to The Free Dictionary is, “a sanctioned doctrine of trial proceedings wherein members of a jury disregard either the evidence presented or the instructions of the judge in order to reach a verdict based upon their own consciences. It espouses the concept that jurors should be the judges of both law and fact.” Jury nullification can take place any time individuals misinterpret the law to what they believe the law means regardless of evidence in favor of or against a person charged with a particular crime. Before the time of the Civil Rights Movements in America, African American people had been accused of committing a crime and be found guilty without any evidence to prove his or her innocence or guilt because only White men served on the jury. Race-based jury nullification centers on the defendant’s race and the makeup of the jury. Racism can be one of the leading causes for the nullification of a verdict.