Jury Trial Analysis Clarissa Messer CJA/364 March 28, 2012 Blayne Allsup Jury Trial Judges in Carson City Nevada complain “costs of a jury trial cost Nevada and many other states as much as 5,000 dollars per day to conduct a trial” (Vin Suprynowicz, Enter Stage Right, March 1999). However, an accused criminal, and the government play many roles on the process leading into a jury trial. The first obvious step is an individual must commit a crime (break the law). The arresting officer must file a report of the crime committed, and the report is sent off to the prosecuting lawyer. The prosecutor decides if he or she wants to proceed to file charges on the said individual.
As mentioned earlier, the Right of Self-Representation is this right to represent oneself as Pro Sea. Presently, courts at all levels of the Criminal Justice system require that the defendant be aware and understand the disadvantages of representing one’s self as most people not practicing law, will not be aware of certain defenses that can facilitate their case. A person going Pro Sea will have to sign a waiver or
The case that I will be writing a brief on is the case DICKERSON v. UNITED STATES, 530 U.S. 428 (2000). In this case, Charles Dickerson, the petitioner, confessed to committing a crime during his questioning by law enforcement. The petitioner motioned to the court that his confession was obtained by his law enforcement officer before being read his Miranda rights. Subsequently, “[t]he District Court granted Dickerson’s motion and suppressed the statement as evidence, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (the “Fourth Circuit”) allowed the statements into evidence.”(casebriefs) Ever since the case Miranda v. Arizona was heard in 1966, “Miranda has become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture.” (Samaha, J.) Chief Justice William Rehnquist referred to the Miranda case during the ruling of the 2000 Dickerson v. United States.
Hudson was charged under Michigan law with unlawful drug and firearm possession. When police arrived to execute the warrant, they announced their presence, but waited only a short time perhaps “three to five seconds” before turning the knob of the unlocked front door and entering Hudson’s home. At trial Hudson argued that police violated the knock and announce requirement, therefore all the evidence stemming from the search warrant should be inadmissible. The Trial Judge granted the motion to suppress the evidence. On appeal, Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the motion to suppress.
Terrance Taylor ADJ 4 Oliver Thompson 4-2-11 Terrancetaylor32@yahoo.com 951-316-2072 Case Law Oliver Thompson was arrested for 459 pc- Burglary of an inhabited dwelling, 12964 Bordeaux Court, Moreno Valley, CA. He was arrested March 27, 2011, and his bail was set at 50,000. Upon his arrest, Oliver was searched and a hand gun with altered numbers, and a silencer was found on him. 459 pc is burglary, which is entering a structure with the intent to commit a felony once inside. All though burglary is referred to as “breaking and entering,” prosecutors can charge you with this offense even if there is no forced entry of the structure.
He is calling out Governors, and urging viewers of his program The Factor to write their state representatives and push Jessica’s Law. On a recent interview on The Factor with Jesse Watters, Colorado Speaker of the House, Mark Ferrandino strongly opposed Jessica’s Law. He argued saying Colorado has “strict enough” laws concerning child sexual abuse. Just to illustrate how “strong” Colorado’s laws are, here is an example of their pathetic judicial system: a man in Colorado who raped ten children at a daycare center was sentenced to a laughable two years in prison (O’Reilly). Colorado is one of the only states in the Union that does not support Jessica’s Law, or the safety of children.
Unfortunately, Mr. Pickering was removed from his teaching position but he did not stop fighting for his case. (Secunda 2010) The appellant, Marvin Pickering, then requested the review of the Board's action in the Circuit Court of Will County, Illinois, which declared his dismissal on the grounds that his letter was detrimental to the interests of the school system. Fortunately while on appeal the Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed the judgment. He was then able to requested review in the US Supreme Court and the high court granted certiorari. The US Supreme Court ruled eight votes for Pickering and one vote against.
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.
- E. REMOVAL, IMPEACHMENT AND LIABILITY o 1. REMOVAL All officers can be removed for high crimes and misdemeanors, (no legal definition) § A. House can impeach and will issue a bill of impeachment accusing senior officers of high crimes and misdemeanors. § B. Impeachmentà doesnt remove from office. Just directs to next stage.
Persuasive Speech Specific Purpose: To persuade the class to learn and assert their legal rights I. INTRODUCTION A. Attention Getter: You have the right to remain silent, anything you say and do Will be used against you in a court of law; you have the right to have an attorney present, if you can not afford an attorney one will be appointed to you free of charge. B. Relating to the audience: Do you understand these rights?