Evidence and Sentencing Mark Passi CJA 204 January 25, 2012 Ray Rawlins A presiding judge in a court of law is to make sure constitutional rights of the accused are protected during trial proceedings. A conviction by a court jury of the defendant will give the judge authority to impose reasonable punishment based upon the severity of the crime committed. The goal of “retribution” to a convicted person has changed throughout history of the criminal justice system. It is important to give a well deserve punishment for the severity of the crime. This sentencing goal is critical due to the fact that different state has different sentencing laws.
2. Explain why discretionary decision making occurs in the criminal courts and then provide some specific examples of prosecutorial discretion. 3. In general, “justice delayed is justice denied.” Explain the meaning of this phrase and how it affects defendants. What steps have legislatures taken to deal with the problem of court delay?
● The exclusionary rule is the main remedy that will be focused on throughout the remainder of this book. It requires that evidence obtained in violation of certain constitutional amendments (notably the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth) be excluded from the criminal trial. Exceptions to the exclusionary rule have been recognized in cases in which (1) the police acted in good faith but nonetheless violated the Constitution and (2) the prosecutor sought to impeach a witness at trial by pointing to contradictions in his or her out-of-court statements, even if such statements were obtained in an
This argument can be broken down into a premise and a conclusion. The premise is ‘for felony capital murder’ and the conclusion to this premise is ‘Singleton was to be executed’. There is an additional premise ‘became insane while in prison’. This premise has the same conclusion ‘Singleton was to be executed’. In this case, we should be aware of the past tense verb ‘was’.
The notion that the more serious the threatened harm, the more justified the court would be in examining acts further back in the series of acts that would lead to crime completion. The clearer the intent to commit the offense, the less proximate the acts need to be to the completion of the crime to constitute the crime of
Elements: These are the specifics of the offense. In order to support a finding of "guilty," the government must prove each and every element of the offense, beyond a reasonable doubt. Explanation: The explanation defines terms, and clarifies the elements, based on previous court decisions. Lesser Included Offense: These are lesser offenses that a military court may still find an accused guilty of, even if the court finds the accused not guilty of the originally charged offense. For example, "Manslaughter," under Article 119 is a lesser included offense of "Murder," under Article 118.
If Joe Justice wants to get the deal done with Jim Lawbreaker, what options does he have in terms of bringing charges against him? I am not sure about the options the Joe Justice has regarding making a deal with Jim Lawbreaker, I think that the one of the charges would be accessory to commit a crime, and since he wasn’t the main character in the robbery and I think that in order to get to the main culprit the deal that Jim Lawbreaker attorney is offering is fair since the results of the lab tests are incomplete and a statement from Jim will help the prosecutor make sure that Martin goes to jail for the crime. The evidence does not place Lawbreaker on the scene and no witnesses can place him there either. 2. Does Joe Justice have enough evidence to take a case against Slick Martin to grand
Scenario One: Can Ken be convicted of a homicide offense? Explain and justify your answer. Ken can be convicted for a couple different homicide charges in this case and in this paragraph. One of the homicide offenses they can be charged with is reckless homicide code 0142 this would be the charge if Ken had accidentally disclosed the information. Another charge that Ken can be tagged with is first degree homicide code 0110 if it is found that Ken willfully and premeditated doing it.
To ensure judicial oversight to this decision, Rule 5(a) requires that after arrest, the defendant must be brought before a magistrate judge for an initial appearance “without unnecessary delay,” a phrase discussed at length in later sections. [FN29] The government must then “promptly” file a complaint in the district where the crime occurred that demonstrates probable cause as required by Rule 4(a). [FN30] This can afford the defendant the opportunity to contest his continued detention by challenging the sufficiency of the
Although careful to avoid making categorical pronouncements on matters still awniting decision by . an appellate court, Devlin J has done enough to indicate the need for more intensive study of the dual problems indicated above.= This need is accentuated by examination of the separate judgments .. . delivered by Lord Goddard C J and Pearson J, t he other members of the court. In t he case before the court two informations had been preferred against the respondent, the first for dangerous driving contrary to the Road Traffic Act, 1980, s. 11 (I), and the second for failing to conform .to n “ H alt y y sign contrnry to section 49 ( b) of the same statute. At the hearing in the magistrates’ court the justices had accepted the respondent’s evidence that he remembered nothing of events leading up to the accident in which he was involved until he was found by the police in a dazed condition.