The prosecution defense.
Simplyme28
Lecture7.Thecourtsandjudiciary.pdf
Chapter 7: The Courts and Judiciary
The Court Process
• As talked about in the early chapters, the U.S. criminal justice is large and complex • When we look at the U.S. court system, it is also a complex system on
its own • Despite its complexity, the U.S. court system is considered one of the best in
the world.
Judicial Power • The judicial power of the U.S. is vested in one Supreme Court • There are a lot of lower courts that fall under the Supreme Court
• Judicial review: allows higher courts to review the decisions of lower courts. • Gives Supreme Court authority over constitutionality of law.
**Separation of governmental branches ensures judges are free to make decisions without political influence.
2
The Court Process • Relies on the Constitution to set standards to
ensure our rights are protected.
• Judges decide cases based upon:
1. Strict interpretation of the Constitution • Which means they apply the law based
on the literal words of the Constitution, regardless of the current context that is happening socially, historically, or technologically.
• This perspective is known as viewing the Constitution with “literal meaning”.
3
The Court Process 2. Interpret the Constitution within the context of historical, societal, and technological events
• This means that the justices consider the context of key events that are occurring at the time to inform their decisions.
• Permits advances in society (especially technological advances) that are unforeseen.
• Also known as judicial activism: variation from the clear meaning of the text, allows for broad interpretation. • Can be viewed negatively, but also
have positive outcomes.
4
The Court Process 5
The Court Process
What about a modern example of judicial activism?
Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) • Supreme Court recognized the constitutional right to marry. • Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, marriage was a state matter/state law. • But, due to same-sex agencies and court cases in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky,
and Tennessee, it drew attention to the U.S. Supreme Court. • Supreme Court ruled that bans against same-sex marriages violated the
equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. • 5-4 ruling.
• Many commentators also viewed Obergefell’s decision as judicial activism. 6
Federal Court System
Federal Courts • Dual court system: separate system for federal and state levels.
• In most cases, state supreme courts interpret and decide constitutional issues arising from each of the sovereignties, unless a federal issue is involved.
• If a federal issue is involved in a state court, then the case can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is done via a “writ of certiorari”
7
Federal Court System Federal Courts
• Jurisdiction: refers to a court’s authority to hear certain types of cases.
• Federal cases will not hear cases involving state laws, unless the laws conflict or the issue is appealed as a constitutional matter.
• Jurisdiction varies according to the type of case and action.
** This is where we find specialized jurisdictions like family, divorce, juvenile, bankruptcy cases.**
8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xnzGSV66x4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEjgAXxrkXY
Federal Court
System: U.S. Supreme
Court
• HIGHEST COURT in the federal system. • Established by the Judiciary Act of
1789. • 1 chief justice + 8 associate justices. • Appointment by president, who
nominates a candidate for approval by Congress.
• Lifetime appointment. • A lot of discretion in cases heard. • En banc: A case heard by the full
court.
10
Federal Court
System: U.S. Supreme
Court
As a though experiment, I want you to consider: 1. Are there benefits to having a lifetime appointment?
2. Are there challenges or problems to having a lifetime appointment?
3. Do you think there should be a lifetime appointment or limits to the appointment?
11
12
Federal Court System: Court of Appeals Federal Courts: U.S. Court of Appeals
• Hears cases involving patent laws and appealed decision
• Most cases: criminal, prisoner petitions, and administrative decisions
• Federal district courts: jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases.
13
Federal Court System: Court of Appeals
Federal Courts: U.S. Court of Appeals • Federal district courts consist of 94 judicial districts including DC
and Puerto Rico and U.S. Bankruptcy Court. • Two specialized courts:
• U.S. Courts of International Trade. • U.S. Courts of Federal Claims.
• Court of last resort: Final court with appellate authority in a given court system. (SCOTUS at the federal level.)
14
State Court System State Courts
• Structures vary, but most reflect the federal system 1. Supreme Court, 2. Intermediate
appellate court, 3. Trial courts.
• State Supreme Courts = ”courts of last resort” for the majority of state laws.
15
State Court System – Appellate Court
State Courts • State appellate courts:
intermediate courts between the trial courts and supreme courts.
• Make determinations on all filed cases and many of the cases are filed “pro se.” • Pro se: Without legal
representation. • # of judges serving on
intermediate courts varies from state to state • Usually, 3-judge panel.
16
State Court System – Trial Court
State Courts
• Trial courts: may be general or limited jurisdiction (aka felony, district, circuit, or superior courts).
• Hears serious criminal and civil cases.
• Operate under rules of evidence established by procedural law.
17
State Court System – Limited Jurisdiction
State Courts • Limited jurisdiction (magistrate, municipal, city, county, and
justice of the peace courts) hears cases involving misdemeanors. • Limited in sentencing powers to fines, community
corrections, and incarceration in jail. • Example: speeding ticket.
18
Federal and State Court System - Difference
Differences Between Federal and State Courts • Federal courts represent one branch of government established
by the Constitution.
• Jurisdiction varies based on the types of cases they handle.
• In federal courts, all felony prosecutions must be initiated by indictment and are used in cases involving more serious crimes.
• State court cases may begin with an information or complaint.
19
Federal and State Court System - Difference
Differences Between Federal and State Courts • Indictment: results from grand juries that are assembled to hear
evidence deciding whether or not a person should be charged with an offense.
• Information: formal accusation issued by prosecutors.
20
The Judicial Process – FEDERL CASE FLOW • Depending on jurisdiction and issues, cases follow different flows. • Federal felony case flow:
21
U.S. attorney presents
evidence to grand jury.
If charged, arraignment
then appeal (if filed).
Court of Appeals
reviews for legal errors
only.
If a constitutional issue exists, may petition
for SCOTUS to hear the case.
The Judicial Process – STATE CASE FLOW
• State felony case flow:
22
Usually begins at state district
court.
Convicted defendants
may appeal if the judge made a
procedural error.
If a prejudicial error was
made, appellate court
may reverse and remand
the case.
If constitutional
issue is involved, may
proceed to state supreme
court or SCOTUS.
Court Congestion and the Consequences
• “Justice delayed in justice denied:”
• Common theme in legal jurisprudence. • Courts face ENORMOUS caseloads that often impede
processing.
• Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy trial. • Federal Speedy Trial Act in 1974 requires those charged with
a crime be indicted within 30 days and that trial occurs within 70 days after indictment.
23
Court Congestion and the Consequences
• Delays can create both positive and negative consequences for involved parties. • Many defendants waive their right to a speedy trial as it is
often in their best interest.
• Is this delay problematic?
• How can delays work in favor of the courtroom?
24
Specialized and Problem- Solving Courts
• https://www.flcourts.org /Resources- Services/Office-of- Problem-Solving-Courts
• Specialized courts: specific offenses and offenders.
Drug Courts
• First implemented in 1989 and have grown in popularity. • KEY = COLLABORATION
25
Specialized and Problem-Solving Courts
26
Specialized and Problem-Solving Courts Domestic Violence Courts • For intimate partner/domestic violence • Created in 1990s. • 208 operating in the United States as of 2009. • Why needed? • Process cases more efficiently by focusing on rehabilitation and
deterrence. • Collaboration in these courts occurs among judges,
healthcare workers, police, prosecutors, and treatment providers.
• Two primary goals: victim safety and offender accountability.
27
Specialized and Problem-Solving Courts
Veterans Treatment Courts • First begun in 2008 in Buffalo, New York • Goal: To assist returning servicemen and servicewomen with mental
health disorders who face criminal prosecution. • One judge and an interdisciplinary team including an expanded
courtroom work group and mental health professionals or peers, devise a holistic treatment plan.
28
Specialized and Problem-Solving Courts
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) • ADR: not a specialized court, but offender’s means of settling cases
without costly litigation. 1. Negotiation: meeting of disagreeing parties to work toward
a solution. 2. Mediation: informal process using a neutral third party that
encourages parties to settle their dispute to everyone’s satisfaction.
3. Arbitration: similar to trial proceeding with less discovery and fewer rules of evidence.
29
The Judiciary
The Role of Judges • Responsible for functioning of the courtroom in hearings and trials. • Determine appropriate conduct, what evidence may be introduced,
and correct procedures.
• Bench trials: judges hears the evidence without a jury present and make a ruling on guilt or innocence. • Oversee trial proceedings. • Sentencing. • Double jeopardy and appeals.
30
The Judiciary Selection of Judges • Qualifications for a judge: • State residency. • License to practice law.
• Member of the state bar. • Age ranging 25–70.
31
The Judiciary Selection of Judges
• Missouri plan (merit selection system): attempts to eliminate politics from the selection process. • Research shows little difference in performance quality or legitimacy between
elected and appointed judges.
32
Diversity in the Judiciary
Women in the Judiciary
• In the late 1800s women began to fight to attend law school, to be admitted to the bar, and to serve as judge.
• Bradwell v. State of Illinois (1873). • The right to practice a profession is not
addressed in the Fourteenth Amendment’s privileges and immunities clause.
• In 1873: Belva Lockwood was the first woman to be accepted to the bar in Washington, D.C.
• Of 112 justices who served on the U.S. Supreme Court, only four were women.
33
Diversity in the Judiciary
Women in the Judiciary
• Women comprise of only 10% of the 10th Circuit’s active members. • About 30% of the active U.S. district judges are women. • Only 68 women of color are serving as active federal judges. • Seven federal courts of appeals have no active women judges. • As a thought experiment, consider: • What are some potential impacts of having an all-male court of
appeals? • What are some potential impacts of having an all-female court of
appeals? • What are some potential impacts of having a mix of male and
female judges in the court of appeals?
34
Diversity in the Judiciary
Racial Diversity in the Judiciary
• Macon Boling Allen first black attorney in the United States in Maine in 1844.
• In 1945, the first Black judge to serve at the federal level was appointed by President Truman.
• Thurgood Marshall first black Supreme Court Justice appointed in 1967 (pictured here). • Appointed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967. • Served until 1992. • Argued the Brown v. Board of Education case before the
Supreme Court as chief counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.
• The NAACP Legal Defense Fund is still operating today. To learn more, please see the link: https://www.naacpldf.org/about-us/history/thurgood- marshall/
35
Diversity in the Judiciary
Racial Diversity in the Judiciary
• Hernandez v. Texas (1954): Mexican Americans and racial groups have equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Alberto Gonzalez was the first Hispanic Attorney General to serve the United States, appointed in 2005.
• Sonia Sotomayor was the first Hispanic associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, appointed in 2009 (pictured here). • Appointed by President Barack Obama. • Still an active SCOTUS justice today.
36
