He or she is responsible for ensuring the court proceedings are legal, and that the defendant receives his or her rights to due process of law. The judge does this by setting the rules of the courtroom and acting as a referee between opposing council. Although a judges’ most visible role is during a criminal or civil trial, he or she has many responsibilities. Prior to any court hearing, the judge is responsible for signing search and arrest warrants. 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.
The civil tort suit is completely different and therefore does not fall under double jeopardy. Whether Armington is guilty or not guilty in the criminal trial Jennings can bring a civil suit against Armington to recover damages. Jennings was injured during the crime so he has the right to pursue a civil case to cover his injury. References Lectlaw.com (1995-2012). Double Jeopardy.
After the questioner the police officer will have to build a case with the evidences gathered and send a case with the evidences to CPS (Crown Prosecution Services). Then CPS could state whether it’s enough evidences gathered to take the person to court or it can state that there is not enough evidences. That where it comes to the bail. (www.findlaw.co.uk) The bail can be granted or denied it all depends what is the offence and whether the person can be dangerous if goes back to the society/community. If the person is arrested on suspicious of the murder that would be clearly obvious that the person wouldn’t get the bail, as that person could try to run away also could attempt more murders or even self-harmed.
In conclusion, if I were the judge ruling in this case, I could apply the exclusionary rule and any evidence that was obtained during the unlawful search would not be admissible. I would rule this way with the Mapp decision as my precedent, to ensure that police departments are encouraging their officers adhere to constitutional
If a judge perceives that the plea bargain is too lenient the judge has the right to reject the plea and order of the prosecuting and the defense to renegotiate. Defendants that are pleading guilty as a result of the plea agreement must acknowledge their plea in open court. Defendant who pleads guilty after the plea has been negotiations do not surrender their right to an appeal; their conviction goes to the Appellate Division of Superior Courts. Also if a defendant pleading guilty to a crime
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.
● 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
According to Legal Definitions.com, 2004-2007, no contest “refers to the defendant’s plea to the court that he or she would not fight against or dispute the allegations or charges filed against him or her.” If the defendant enters a plea of not guilty, and the crime committed is severe enough, the defendant may be applicable to with stand a jury trial. These crimes mainly include major drug trafficking, murder, kidnapping, etc. Steps in a Jury Trial The first step in a jury trial is the selection of a jury. Selection of a jury is a process that begins with a large group of individuals in the same room interviewed, and asked questions by a lawyer to determine his or her eligibility. The jurors must not withhold any personal biases and must be completely honest in his or her answers.
The criminal investigation process is a complex aspect of the legal system that aims to gather evidence lawfully, justly and in the accordance with the rights of the victims, accused and society.The criminal investigation process encapsulates the powers of police to detain suspects, gather evidence, interrogate and to search and seize property, through the appropriate use of warrants and other legal means. The criminal investigation process also entails the rights of suspects, such as to bail and remand and the right to counsel during interrogation. Police investigate most alleged crimes, but it is left to their discretion as to whether or not the alleged criminal activity warrants investigation. This may come down to the resources that the police have at
An appeal is a request to a higher (appellate) court for that court to review and change the decision of a lower court. The defendant may challenge the conviction itself or may appeal the trial court's sentencing decision without actually challenging the underlying conviction (Nolo, 2014). An appeal is not are retrial. In juvenile court juveniles must wait until their case has concluded in adult court before they can appeal the fact they were transferred there in the first place. In adult cases they can have a retrial with a different jury to see if they get a better sentence.