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
Many decisions pertaining to a case going to trial and how actively they pursue the case are left up to prosecutors and how they view the evidence and what the evidence means to them. This can be described as prosecutorial discretion. How does this affect the prosecutor and overall case flow in the criminal court system? Prosecutorial discretion puts an abundance of pressure on the prosecutors and their roles in the courts. The prosecution must without a reasonable doubt prove the defendant is responsible for committing the crime.
This is “the practice by law enforcement of considering race as an indicator of the likelihood of criminal behavior” (Robinson 530). The issue of using race to identify people is disputable because minorities feel that it is an act of inequality and also humiliating. However, the Supreme Court supports its legality as long as ethnicity is seen as an important factor that determines the detainment of an individual. Therefore, there are many pros and cons about the legality of this law enforcement technique. During times of war, racial
Race-Based Jury Nullification Race-based jury nullification has been in the criminal justice system for many years. It is known to be the most debatable topic amongst citizens, whether they support it or against it. A person should be judged on the sources of the law. When race-based jury nullification became noticeable and a serious problem, many communities made sure a specific amount of minorities are placed on a jury to ensure there’s not as many cases where racial biases could ultimately determine the final decision made on the defendant. On top of making sure there is a certain number of minorities constitute every jury, judges encourage jurors to enter the jury room mindful that race has no final say so on the final decision.
Racism can be one of the leading causes for the nullification of a verdict. The same racism exists today driving juries to nullify the law in favor of or against a person charged with a crime. The ethnicity of jurors can influence whether or not nullification takes place. “Jury nullification is often attributed to juries that identify with and share the same characteristics as the defendant, such as the defendant’s racial or ethnic background, socioeconomic status, or value system. The occurrence of this type of nullification has been attributed to a potential response to social conditions, including the perception that the criminal justice system targets minorities,” (Keneally, 2010-2011, p. 945-946).
Jury Nullification Paper John Doe CJA 344 August 2012 Instructor Name Jury Nullification Paper Jury Nullification and it’s affects on the criminal justice system. Jury Nullification is a process that allows jurors to acquit an individual, even when they are technically guilty, and not warrant for punishment. In essence the juror are suggesting that the law in general is unfair or in a particular case. Jury Nullification “Is rooted in English common law and is sometimes used in cases, in which the jury believes a prosecutor enforced an unpopular law or a jury sympathizes with the defendant” (McNamara & Burns, 2009, p. 265). Because of perceived mistreatment of African American by the criminal justice system, Jury Nullification has become controversial because a number of well-known African American scholars encouraged Black jurors to acquit Black defendants (McNamara & Burns, 2009).
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.
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.
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.
James Wetzel CRMJ 101-52 Online Jury Nullification-Article 1 Jury Nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict against the proof of guilt because the jurors believe the law to be unjust or unjustly applied. As a result, the defendant is declared innocent, or is given a lesser penalty, even though without an act of jury nullification they would have been found guilty. While this all seems great, jury nullification is a source of much debate in today’s society. Some maintain that it is an important safeguard or last resort again the wrongful punishment and imprisonment. While others often view it as a violation of the right of a jury and undermining that law.