Criminal Justice Exam

Criticism of Plea Bargaining: main arguments

• Plea bargaining is unfair because defendants give up some of their constitutional rights, especially the right to trial by jury. • Plea bargaining reduces society's interest in appropriate punishments for crimes. • Hidden from judicial scrutiny— as the agreement is most often made at an early stage when the judge has little information about the crime or the defendant and thus cannot adequately evaluate the case. • Innocent people will plead guilty to acts that they did not commit.

Bench trials

• Presided over by a judge without a jury. • In the federal court system, the trial must be conducted by a jury unless (1) the defendant waives the jury trial in writing, (2) the government agrees, and (3) the court approves • In each state, the circumstances in which bench trials apply vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

c) Presentation of Prosecution Evidence

• Presumption of innocence • Real evidence −Physical evidence such as weapons, records, fingerprints, and stolen property involved in the crime • Demonstrative evidence −Evidence that is not based on witness testimony −Demonstrates information relevant to the crime, such as maps, X-rays, and photographs; includes real evidence • Testimony −Oral evidence provided by a legally competent witness • Direct evidence −Eyewitness accounts • Circumstantial evidence −Evidence provided by a witness from which a jury must infer a fact

3) Plea Bargaining

• Quick resolution of cases by negotiated guilty pleas • Advantages for defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges • Defendants can have their cases completed more quickly and know what the punishment will be.

How many jurors are on a jury? • Williams v. Florida (1970):

• Traditionally 12 citizens; • Six states use juries with fewer than 12 in noncapital felony cases (Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Massachusetts, and Utah. • Williams v. Florida (1970): The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that juries of fewer than 12 members are constitutional.

Defense Attorney:

the lawyer representing accused offenders and convicted offenders in their dealings with criminal justice Remember that, in reality, the defense attorney does not need to defend the client in front of the jury; most cases find resolution through relatively quick plea bargaining and discretionary dismissals In these cases, the defense attorney may seem less like the prosecutor's adversary and more like a partner in the effort to dispose of cases as quickly and efficiently as possible through negotiation

Exceptions to the exclusionary rule

"Good faith" exception - Officers acted with the honest belief they were following proper rules. - United States v. Leon (1984) - the officers acted with the honest belief that they were following the proper rules, but the judge issued the warrant improperly. Inevitable discovery -Improperly obtained evidence can be used if it would inevitably have been discovered by police. -Nix v. Williams (1984) - when the defendant told where the victim's body was, he didn't receive Miranda's rights, but a police team was searching the place and would have found the body anyway.

2023 Plea Bargain Task Force Report:

"Plea bargaining has become the primary way to resolve criminal cases in the United States, with nearly 98% of convictions nationwide currently coming from guilty pleas"

Common law:

"body of law" based on court decisions rather than codes or statutes The core of the common law system is the legal principle of stare decisis, a Latin term that translates to "to stand by things decided". In essence, stare decisis requires courts and judges to abide by previous decisions and rulings Benefits: flexibility; efficiency; predictability

The Criminal Trial:

The criminal trial is an exceptional case The seriousness of the charge is the most critical factor influencing the decision to go to trial Even when there is a criminal trial, not always they will be a jury trial

Assigned Counsel

- an attorney in private practice assigned by a court to represent an indigent This system is frequently utilized in small towns and rural regions. Assigned counsel systems are generally structured either on an ad hoc or a coordinated basis. When an indigent defendant requires representation, the judge may either select an attorney from a prearranged rotation list or choose a lawyer who is present in the courtroom and has a reputation for providing competent representation. The fees paid to assigned counsel are typically lower compared to what a lawyer might typically charge

Charges/count:

After deciding that a case should be prosecuted, the prosecutor can determine what charges to file. A single criminal incident may involve the violation of several laws so that the prosecutor can bring a single charge or more than one. Other charges or counts may be added, depending on the nature of the incident.

In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, police officers are trained to read a standard set of Miranda warnings. As indicated in Part II.A. of this article, this standardization was confirmed by our sample, in which the warnings read to suspects included five separate elements or prongs:

1. You have the right to remain silent. 2. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law 3. You have the right to consult with a lawyer before questioning and to have a lawyer present with you during questioning 4. If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be appointed to represent you at public expense before or during any questioning, if you so wish 5. If you decide to answer questions now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop the questioning and remain silent at any time you wish, and the right to ask for and have a lawyer at any time you wish, including during the questioning

Politics can influence in prosecution's decision and can cause prosecutorial misconduct The U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue in Brady v Maryland (1963)

A Maryland jury found John Brady and Charles Boblit guilty of first degree murder in the state Circuit Court of Anne Arundel County. Brady maintained that he participated in the preceding robbery but not in the killing. At sentencing, both men received the death penalty. After the trial, Brady learned that Boblit previously confessed to the murder, but the prosecution suppressed that evidence for Brady's trial. The Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors have a constitutional obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense, even if the defense does not explicitly request it. This obligation is now known as the "Brady rule", and it has been applied in many subsequent cases.

Jury Trial

A jury is a panel of citizens selected according to law and sworn to determine matters of fact in a criminal case and to deliver a guilty or not guilty verdict. The jury evaluates the facts. Judge referees and ensures jury impartiality

The consequences of Miranda:

Interviews should be audio or video recorded to prove suspect statements are voluntary If a court later decides that a suspect had Miranda's rights violated, any statement made by the suspect can not be used as evidence The Court extended Mirandas to juveniles in 2011 (J.D.B. v. North Carolina)

Escobedo v Illinois (1964): declaring Miranda's rights was a process

A suspect who was being interrogated by police while in custody, who had not been warned of his right to remain silent, and who had requested and been denied an opportunity to consult with his lawyer, had been denied the assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment. Any statement elicited under such circumstances could not be used against him at a criminal trial.

Functions of the Judge:

Adjudicator: applies the law equally and fairly Negotiator: plea bargains, sentencing, and bail Administrator: Managing courtroom, deals with political powers and legislators

New York V Quarles (1984)

After receiving the description of Quarles, an alleged assailant, a police officer entered a supermarket, spotted him, and ordered him to stop. Quarles stopped and was frisked by the officer. Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster, the officer asked Quarles where his gun was. Quarles responded. The officer then formally arrested Quarles and read him his Miranda rights Should the Court suppress Quarles's statement about the gun and the gun itself because the officer had failed to read Quarles his Miranda rights at the time? No. The Court held that there is a "public safety" exception to the requirement that officers issue Miranda warnings to suspects. Since the police officer's request for the location of the gun was prompted by an immediate interest in assuring that it did not injure an innocent bystander or fall into the hands of a potential accomplice to Quarles, his failure to read the Miranda warning did not violate the Constitution

b) Opening statements

After the jury has been selected, the trial begins. The clerk reads the complaint (indictment or information) detailing the charges, and the prosecutor and the defense attorney may, if they desire, make opening statements to the jury to summarize the position that each side intends to take. The statements are not evidence.

Oregon vs. Mathiason (1977)

An Oregon state police officer suspected Carl Mathiason of burglary and asked him to come to the police station for questioning. Mathiason came freely, spoke with the officer, and was not arrested at the time. He was arrested later, and a trial court used evidence obtained during the questioning to convict him. Mathiason moved to suppress the evidence since he was not read his Miranda rights before the questioning. The court admitted the evidence since Mathiason was not in custody during the questioning.

Nolle prosequi:

An entry made by a prosecutor on the record of a case and announced in court, indicating that the charges specified will not be prosecuted. In effect, the charges are thereby dismissed.

Combined with the risk of violence and poor nutrition these inhumane conditions lead to people dying in jail, many by suicide

Around 1,000 people die in jail each year, the vast majority of which are pre-trial The number of US citizens incarcerated whilst unconvicted is the highest in the world due to rapid increases since 1970

3. The Prosecutor's Roles:

As "lawyers for the state", prosecutors face conflicting pressures to press charges vigorously against lawbreakers while also upholding justice and the rights of the accused. These pressures are often called "the prosecutor's dilemma." While accomplishing their roles, prosecutors must uphold the law and pursue charges against lawbreakers while enforcing the rules of due process to ensure that the police act according to the law and uphold defendants' rights.

Batson v. Kentucky (1986)

Batson, a black man, was on trial charged with second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the jury selection, the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike the four black persons on the venire, resulting in a jury composed of all whites.Batson was convicted on both of the charges against him. The Court found that the prosecutor's actions violated the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. Racial discrimination in the selection of jurors not only deprives the accused of important rights during a trial but also is devastating to the community at large because it "undermines public confidence in the fairness of our system of justice."

Exclusionary rule- Mapp v. Ohio (1961)

Because the Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by all law enforcement officials, evidence found through improper searches or seizures must be excluded from use at state and federal trials.

Discretion of the Prosecutor:

Charges/count:After deciding that a case should be prosecuted, the prosecutor can determine what charges to file. A single criminal incident may involve the violation of several laws so that the prosecutor can bring a single charge or more than one. Other charges or counts may be added, depending on the nature of the incident. Discovery: information from the prosecutor's case file must be available to the defense. For example, the defense has the right to see any statements made by the accused during interrogation by the police, as well as the results of any physical or psychological tests. Discovery is a pre-trial phase of the criminal process during which the prosecution and defense exchange information and evidence related to the case. It typically occurs after the arraignment or initial appearance and before the trial begins. Nolle prosequi: An entry made by a prosecutor on the record of a case and announced in court, indicating that the charges specified will not be prosecuted. In effect, the charges are thereby dismissed.

The presumption of innocence:

Criminal defense attorneys work on behalf of people accused of crimes- and under the American criminal justice system, defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty The presumption of innocence is fundamental, but is it in the Constitution? The presumption of innocence is not guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution However, statues and the U.S. Supreme Court cases have recognized it as one of the most basic requirements of a fair trial According to the Supreme Court, the presumption of innocence is one of the basic rights guaranteeing a due process

d) Presentation of Defense Evidence

Defense is not required to answer the case presented, but normally one of the following occurs: −Contrary evidence is introduced to rebut or cast doubt on the state's case. −An alibi is offered. −An affirmative defense is presented. Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination means that the defendant does not have to testify. • The prosecutor may not comment on, nor can the jury draw inferences from, the defendant's decision not to appear in their own defense. • Cross-examination

Functions and Structure of american courts

Federal courts; state courts; state supreme courts; US supreme court; tribal courts

Ways of Providing Indigents with Counsel

Each state determines for itself how indigent defendants will be provided with attorneys. Assigned counsel: An attorney in private practice assigned by a court to represent an indigent. Contract counsel: An attorney in private practice who contracts with the government to represent all indigent defendants in a county during a set period. Public defender: An attorney employed on a full-time, salaried basis

Jurisdiction:

Engage in policy-making, especially the highest courts, such as state supreme courts and the U.S. Supreme Court

Operation Varsity Blues: what happened with both actresses?

Felicity Huffman quickly pleaded guilty in April 2019 and was sentenced to 14 days of incarceration, a fine of $30,000, one year of supervised release, and 250 hours of community service. Lori Loughlin pleaded "not guilty" and proceeded toward a trial in late 2020. Loughlin was sentenced to two months in prison, fined $150,000 and ordered to complete 100 hours of community service upon her release. Her husband was sentenced to five months in prison, fined $250,000 and ordered to complete 250 hours of community service.

When does the state decisis admit the overruling of an established precedent?

From Justice Thomas's opinion: The Court views stare decisis as a "principle of policy" that balances several factors to decide whether the scales tip in favor of overruling precedent. Among these factors are the "workability" of the standard, "the antiquity of the precedent, the reliance interests at stake, and of course, whether the decision was well reasoned"

The right to an attorney- Gideon v Wainwright (1963)

Gideon v Wainwright (1963)- U.S. Supreme Court required states to provide free attorneys to low-income defendants Later, the Court extended the right to counsel to preliminary hearings, initial appeals, post-indictment identification lineups, and children in juvenile court proceedings

"Inevitable discovery" exception - Nix v. Williams (1984)

Improperly obtained evidence can be used if it would later have inevitably been discovered without improper actions by the police

Exclusionary rule

In 1914, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in Weeks v. United States that federal courts must exclude any evidence that was obtained through an improper search by federal law enforcement agents. The prosecution can continue, but improperly obtained evidence may not be used.

Miranda's Rule continued

In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court established Miranda rules, overturning the state's decision. Prior to any custodial interrogation, law enforcement officials must provide a person with a clear and explicit warning of their Miranda rights. This warning includes the right to have an attorney present during a police interrogation, and if the person cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for them.

The Sixth Amendment

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense

Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Overview of Federal Criminal Cases:

In the fiscal year 2021, the vast majority of offenders (98.3%) pleaded guilty. This rate has been consistent for over 20 years but reached an all-time high last year. In general, offenders charged with more serious crimes pleaded guilty less often; in more than ten percent of murder, kidnapping, and individual rights cases, the offenders went to trial".

The defense attorney's roles

In many cases, a negotiated plea with a predictable sentence serves the defendant better than a trial spent fending off more serious charges An effective defense attorney does not try to take every case all the way to trial However, attorneys who are inexperienced, uncaring, or overburdened have trouble representing their clients effectively They may quickly agree to a plea bargain and then work to persuade the defendant to accept the agreement

The Prosecutorial Decision Process:

Investigation and arrest: assist police with preparation of search and arrest warrants; receive case file and screen to determine if prosecution should proceed; advise police on evidence needed Initial appearance: As attorney for government, inform court and accused of charges; usually seek high bail for accused; may drop case by entering nolle prosequi Preliminary hearing: establish prima facie case; may nol. Pros.; oppose bail reduction; discuss case with defense Arraignment: present charges against accused through indictment or information; acknowledge defendant's plea; continue plea bargain discussions Pretrial: prepare cases for trial by gathering evidence, interviewing witnesses; oppose pretrial motions filed by defense; accept plea bargain Trial: respond in court to defendant's charge of plea to guilty by reducing charges or take an adversarial stance in jury selection and prove state's case beyond reasonable doubt Sentencing: recommend and justify sentence Appeal: prepare argument to counter appeal filed by defense

Overview of the criminal process (remember judge's role)

Investigation: the police or other law enforcement agency investigate the crime and gather evidence Arrest: if the police believe they have enough evidence to support an arrest, they will take the suspect into custody (how)? Booking: the suspect is taken to a police station and officially processed, which includes taking their fingertips, photographing them, and recording personal information Charging: The prosecutor reviews the evidence and decides whether to charge the suspect with a crime Initial appearance: is the defendant's first court appearance after their arrest, which usually occurs within 24 to 48 hours. The defendant is informed of the charges against them, advised of their constitutional rights, and given the opportunity to request a court-appointed attorney if they cannot afford one. Preliminary hearing: the preliminary hearing, using in about half the state, allows a judge to decide whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and the accused person commits it Information/Indictment: If the preliminary hearing leads to information or the grand jury vote leads to an indictment, the prosecutor prepares the formal charging document and presents it to the court Arraignment: the accused person appears in court to hear the indictment or information read by a judge and to enter a plea Bail: Bail can happen at several points in the criminal process, depending on the jurisdiction and the case's specific circumstances. Typically, bail is set at the initial appearance or arraignment, the defendant's first court appearance after their arrest. Plea Bargaining: Plea bargaining can happen at any point in the criminal process before a verdict is reached in a trial. However, it usually occurs after the initial appearance and before the trial begins Trial: the case is heard before a judge or a jury, and the evidence is presented Sentencing: if the defendant is found guilty, the judge will determine their sentence Appeals: the defendant may appeal the verdict or sentence to a higher court

Inquisitorial process:

Main function: handle dispute processing for society

Adversarial process:

Main function: norm enforcement

Challenging issues about Miranda:

Miranda protects custodial interrogation. What if the questioning happens at the crime scene while the police are evaluating the situation, and the suspect states something important? Miranda does not say a thing about lying or deceiving the suspect. What do you think about that? Do you think people understand Miranda?

Miranda Rules

Miranda v Arizona (1966)- U.S. Supreme Court decision declaring that: -Individual taken into custody as a criminal suspect must be read aloud Miranda warnings -Right to remain silent -Statements can be used against them -Right to have a lawyer present -If one cannot afford a lawyer, the state will provide one -Miranda's rights were created by the Supreme Court to combat law enforcement practices, such as psychological pressure The Miranda warnings inform individuals not only of their right to remain silent and to consult with an attorney, who can better advise them on their right to silence but also of the legal consequences of anything they say. It is a critical moment when the individual must understand that their words can be used against them and carry significant legal implications

Moritz vs Commissioner (1970)

Moritz vs Commissioner, a tax law case, caught Ruth's attention. Charles Moritz is a man from Denver who had to hire a nurse to help him care for his aging mother so he could continue to work. Moritz was denied a tax deduction for the nursing care because, at the time, Section 214 of the Internal Revenue Code specifically limited the deduction to a "woman, a widower or divorcee, or a husband whose wife is incapacitated or institutionalized". The court ruled that Moritz, a man who had never married, did not qualify for the deduction

2. The Prosecutor's Influence:

Most decision-makers in the criminal justice system are involved in only one part of the process. However, prosecutors are involved at multiple stages and can therefore exert significant influence through the use of their broad discretion in decision making.

Miranda's Rule

On March 13, 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in house and brought to the police station, where he was questioned by police officersin connection with a kidnapping and rape. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the defense attorney's objection. The police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held that Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel.

Legal Limitations on police investigations:

Search and seizure: the fourth amendment Questioning suspects: the fifth amendment "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury (...) nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"

Five methods used to select state trial-court judges

Partisan election: an election in which candidates openly affiliated with political parties are presented to voters for selection Nonpartisan selection: an election in which candidates' party affiliations are not listed on the ballot Gubernatorial appointment Legislative selection Merit selection: a reform plan by which judges are nominated by a committee and appointed by the governor for a given period

Key Relationships of the Prosecutor: -Police -Victims and Witnesses - Judges and Courts -The community

Police: Prosecutors depend on the police to provide the suspects and evidence to convict lawbreakers. Because they cannot investigate crimes independently, prosecutors must be in command of the types of cases brought to them. How could this be a problem for the prosecutor? Victims and Witnesses: Although prosecutors can pursue a case whether or not a victim wishes to press charges, many prosecutors will not do so when the critical testimony and other necessary evidence must come from a victim who is unwilling to cooperate Judges and Courts: The sentencing history of each judge gives prosecutors an idea of how a case might be treated in the courtroom. Prosecutors may decide, for instance, to drop a case if they believe that the judge assigned to it will not impose a serious punishment. The Community: Public opinion and the media can play a crucial role in creating an environment that either supports or scrutinizes the prosecutor

Functions of the Judge: Trial Process

Prearrest phase: review requests for and issue or deny search and arrest warrants Initial appearance: advise accused of constitutional rights; determine the bail or pretrial release; decide if case should be dismissed Preliminary hearing: evaluate prosecution and defense claims with regard to probable cause; decide whether evidence exists to hold accused for arraignment; rule on bail reduction request; continue to advise accused as to rights Arraignment: evaluate indictment or information; advise defendant as to plea; ensure defendant understands impact of plea of guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) with regard to waiver of some constitutional rights Pretrial: rule on pretrial motions; answer requests for continuances Trial: oversee jury selection; rule on evidence and other aspects of adversarial procedure; instruct jury as to legal rules affecting case; charge jury and receive report of deliberations; if nonjury trial, determine if guilty Sentence: evaluate presentence report; hear opposing arguments of counsel with regard to sentence; impose sentence

The prosecutorial system: - Prosecuting attorney: - U.S. Attorney: -State attorney general:

Prosecuting attorney: Makes discretionary decisions on whether to pursue criminal charges; they represent the government; known in various states as the district attorney, state's attorney, commonwealth attorney, or county attorney- who pursues cases that violate state law U.S. Attorney: Prosecutes federal cases. One US attorney and a staff of assistant U.S. attorneys prosecute cases in each of the 94 U.S. district courts State attorney general: chief legal officer of a state, responsible for civil and criminal matters

How to Become a Judge:

Public service Private practice to the judgeship Strong connections to political parties Control working schedule

How is it in Wisconsin?

Right-to-counsel services throughout Wisconsin are provided in the first instance by attorneys who are State Public Defenders (SPD) employees and paid by the state, with all of their overhead needs provided by the state. The SPD has 35 local public defender offices to handle trial-level services. The SPD also has an Assigned Counsel Division. They are compensated at $40 per hour. Suppose lawyers are unavailable or unwilling to represent indigent clients at the SPD rate of $40/hour, as is increasingly the case. In that case, judges must appoint a lawyer, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court requires counties to pay $100 per hour for attorneys appointed directly through the courts.

Reed v. Goertz (2023): Argued before the Supreme Court of the U.S. on October 11, 2022

Rodney Reed, a man on death row who has maintained his innocence for over 25 years is appealing a Fifth Circuit decision refusing Reed's request to DNA test crime scene evidence. Reed was convicted of killing a romantic partner despite evidence pointing to her police officer finance. For years, Reed has been in a legal battle with the state of Texas to obtain DNA evidence.

Council for Indigents

Since the 1960s, the Supreme Court has interpreted the "right to counsel" in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution as requiring that the government provide attorneys for indigent defendants who may go to prison or jail

Federal court system:

Starting from bottom to top: District courts -> Circuit courts of appeals -> Supreme Court of United States

Gamble v United States

Terance Martez Gamble was convicted of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. He argues that the district court erred in concluding that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment did not prohibit the federal government from prosecuting Gamble for the same conduct for which he had been prosecuted and sentenced by the state of Alabama. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Abbate v United States, 359 U.S. 187 (1959) that prosecution in federal and state court for the same conduct does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because the state and federal governments are separate sovereigns (the so-called "separate sovereigns" exception). Under this binding precedent, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court. In a 7-2 opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court declined to overturn the dual-sovereignty doctrine.

The U.S. Supreme Court:

The U.S. Supreme Court, with its nine justices, controls its caseload by choosing 75-85 cases to hear from among the 7,000 cases submitted annually. It takes the votes of four justices for the Supreme Court to decide to grant a request to hear a case. Many Supreme Court decisions are unanimous, but other cases are decided by a narrow 5-to-4 vote when the justices are deeply divided The U.S. Supreme Court decides over several matters, including criminal cases

The Functions and Structure of American courts:

The United States has a dual court system. Separate federal and state court systems handle matters throughout the nation. In the United States, state and federal courts use the adversarial process to protect defendants' rights and examine evidence to determine whether a defendant is guilty. The judges oversee the interactions between the attorneys and enforce the rules without imposing their will on the presentation of evidence by attorneys

The Functions and Structure of American courts:

The United States has a dual court system. Separate federal and state court systems handle matters throughout the nation. In the United States, state and federal courts use the adversarial process to protect defendants' rights and examine evidence to determine whether a defendant is guilty. The judges oversee the interactions between the attorneys and enforce the rules without imposing their will on the presentation of evidence by attorneys. The adversarial process is derived from British law and exists in the criminal justice systems of other former British colonies besides the United States.

Public Defenders

The emergence of public defenders was in response to the legal requirements of impoverished defendants. The public defender system is rapidly expanding and implemented in 43 of the 50 most populous counties and major cities. Many professionals and individuals consider the public defender system superior to the assigned counsel system, mainly because public defenders are experts in criminal law. As full-time government staff, public defenders do not prioritize their own financial interests over their clients' cases, unlike appointed and contracted attorneys. Nevertheless, public defenders may confront overwhelming caseloads, and their responsibilities can increase if government spending cuts affect funding for indigent defense

Public safety exception (New York vs Quarles, 1984)

The exception to Miranda rights, where police can ask incriminating questions if the safety of the public is in jeopardy Terrorism?

Frazier v Cupp (1969):

The petitioner was Roy Allen Frazier, convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 15 years to life imprisonment in Oregon state court After preliminary questioning shortly after his arrest, Frazier was told that he could have an attorney if he wanted one and that anything he said could be used against him at trial. Thereafter the interrogating officer falsely told the petitioner, who was reluctant to talk, that Rawls had confessed. Frazier later began to spill his story but again showed reluctance and said he thought he better gets a lawyer before talking. Following the officer's reply that the petitioner could not be in any more trouble than he was in, the petitioner fully confessed and, after further warnings, signed a written confession, which was later admitted into evidence over Frazier`s objection. The United States Supreme Court upheld Frazier's conviction and ruled that the admission of his confession obtained during a police interrogation did not violate his Fifth or Fourteenth Amendment rights

Contract System

This system involves the government contracting with an attorney, a nonprofit organization, or a private law firm to manage all indigent cases. While some jurisdictions rely on public defenders for most cases, they may use contracted services in situations involving multiple defendants or complex cases that may present conflicts of interest. Alternatively, they may use contracted services for cases that require more time than the government-employed lawyers can allocate

State court system:

Trial courts of limited jurisdiction (include municipal, county, and state jurisdictions; variously called circuit, municipal, justice, district or magistrate courts) -> Trial courts of general jurisdiction (variously called district, superior, or circuit courts) -> Intermediate courts of appeals -> Appellate court of last resort (usually called supreme court)

Trial courts of limited jurisdiction: Trial courts of general jurisdiction:

Trial courts of limited jurisdiction: handle only misdemeanors Trial courts of general jurisdiction: handle the full range of felony cases and all other civil lawsuits These are the courts where jury trials occur and judges impose prison sentences. The federal system has no limited jurisdiction for trial courts. All federal cases begin in the general jurisdiction trial courts, the U.S. district courts

Trial process:

Trial process: Selection of the jury -> opening statements by prosecution and defense -> presentation of the prosecution's evidence and witnesses -> presentation of the defense's evidence and witnesses -> Presentation of rebuttal witnesses -> Closing arguments by each side -> Instructions to the jury by the judge -> Decision by the jury

"Good faith" exception- Unites States v. Leon (1984)

Unites States v. Leon (1984) When officers act in good faith reliance on a warrant, the evidence will not be excluded even if the warrant was issued improperly.

Messiah v United States (1964): process of declaring Miranda's rights

While on bail, Messiah had a conversation with one of his codefendants in the absence of counsel. Unknown to Messiah, the codefendant became a government informer and allowed police to install a radio transmitter under the seat of his car. The Supreme Court held that federal agents deliberately elicited incriminating statements in the absence of counsel after the proceeding had begun to violate the Sixth Amendment

The application of the exclusionary rule to the states

Wolf v. Colorado (1949): U.S. Supreme Court did not hold states to the exclusionary rule Mapp v. Ohio (1961): U.S. Supreme Court applied exclusionary rule to states

Santobello v. New York (1971) • Can a defendant seek a new trial when a new prosecutor fails to abide by the terms of his predecessor's plea agreement?

YES. The opinion emphasized that the plea bargaining process is crucial to the criminal justice system. In the interests of justice, agreements between prosecutors and defendants must be upheld. Even though the trial judge claimed that the prosecutor's recommendation did not influence his sentencing decision, the prosecutor had a duty to enforce the original agreement. The Court remanded the case so that the lower court could determine the appropriate relief for Santobello.

a) Jury Selection • Voir dire: • Challenge for cause: • Peremptory challenge:

a) Jury Selection • Voir dire: Questioning prospective jurors to screen out people the attorneys think might be biased or incapable of delivering a fair verdict. • Challenge for cause: Removal of a prospective juror by showing they have some bias or legal disability. The number of such challenges available to attorneys is unlimited. • Peremptory challenge: Removal of a prospective juror without giving a reason. Attorneys are allowed a limited number of such challenges.

Federal courts: federal judges

by contrast, federal judges are nominated by the president and confirmed by a majority vote of the U.S. Senate

Overcoming Miranda: a content analysis of the miranda portion of police interrogations

read

Criminal cases:

both state and federal courts have trial courts and appellate courts

Bail bond

contract between the bail agent, the defendant, and the court. The bond guarantees that the defendant will appear in court on the scheduled date and time, and if the defendant fails to appear, the bail agent may be required to pay the full amount of the bail to the court

Appellate courts:

courts that do not try criminal cases but hear appeals of lower courts' decisions All states have courts of last resort (usually called state supreme courts), and all but a few have an intermediate-level appellate court (traditionally called courts of appeals) In the federal system, the U.S. Supreme Court is the court of last resort, and the U.S. circuit courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts

1. Politics and Prosecution:

except in a few states, prosecutors are elected, usually for a four-year term; local politics thus heavily influence the office Disadvantage: Prosecutors may choose certain cases for prosecution to gain the favor of voters or investigate charges against political opponents and public officials to get the public's attention For the criminal justice system to fulfill American values concerning equality and fairness, prosecutors must use their decision-making authority carefully to avoid inequality and injustice

Discovery:

information from the prosecutor's case file must be available to the defense. For example, the defense has the right to see any statements made by the accused during interrogation by the police, as well as the results of any physical or psychological tests. Discovery is a pre-trial phase of the criminal process during which the prosecution and defense exchange information and evidence related to the case. It typically occurs after the arraignment or initial appearance and before the trial begins.

Waiver of Rights:

one of the biggest challenges with Miranda rights is whether the person has voluntarily and knowingly waived their right to remain silent or to have an attorney present. It can be difficult to determine whether someone has truly understood their rights and voluntarily waived them, or if they were coerced or misled into waiving them

Prosecutorial misconduct:

refers to any improper or unethical conduct by a prosecutor while carrying out their duties in a criminal case. It can take many different forms, including, for instance, withholding exculpatory evidence (Prosecutors have a legal obligation to disclose evidence that is favorable to the defendant, but sometimes they fail to do so)

Criticism of bail:

the bail system facilitates discrimination against the poor − Professional criminals and rich people always make bail. − The average wait is 23 days in jail. − Some people plead guilty to get back to work.

Prosecutorial misconduct claims in Pennsylvania, 2000-2016:

the report analyzes the varied allegations and findings of prosecutorial misconduct in state and federal courts throughout Pennsylvania- in addition to revealing a lack of transparency, challenges with access to information, and a lack of functional accountability mechanisms and deterrents throughout Pennsylvania's criminal justice system Findings: 4,644 opinions containing 7,207 separate claims of prosecutorial misconduct in Pennsylvania over a 17-year period Of the 5,432 claims that were addressed, courts found prosecutorial misconduct in 204 A substantial percentage of allegations of prosecutorial misconduct go unaddressed by courts. Of the 7,207 identified claims of prosecutorial misconduct, courts allowed 1,775 (25%) to remain unaddressed Prosecutorial Misconduct was a contributing factor in 45% of known wrongful convictions in Pennsylvania

Plea bargaining

• A common practice in the United States criminal justice system is generally possible in most criminal cases, including misdemeanor and felony offenses. • The decision to offer a plea bargain is at the prosecutor's discretion. • Typically more common in non-violent crimes. In cases involving violent crimes such as murder or sexual assault, plea bargains may be less common, although they can still occur in some circumstances. • Plea bargaining is a complex process involving negotiations between the prosecution and the defense, and the terms of the plea agreement can vary widely depending on the case's specifics.

1) Bail and Bond

• Bail: the amount of money paid as a condition of pretrial release to ensure the accused appears in court. • Bond: refers to a set of conditions that must be met by the accused to retain their freedom while awaiting trial. Different cases have different requirements. • In the United States, both the police and the judge have a role in setting bail, but the specific process can vary by state and jurisdiction. • In some cases, police officers may be able to set bail for minor offenses. • However, in most cases, bail is set by a judge who will consider various factors, such as the severity of the offense, the defendant's criminal history, and the likelihood of the defendant appearing in court before setting bail. The bail amount may also depend on the defendant's ability to pay.

Plea Bargaining Cases:

• Boykin v. Alabama (1969): Defendants must state that they are making the plea voluntarily. • Missouri v. Frye (2012): Sixth Amendment right to counsel includes protection against ineffective assistance of counsel in the plea bargaining process. • North Carolina v. Alford (1970): Guilty plea by defendant who maintains their innocence may be accepted for the purpose of a lesser sentence. • Ricketts v. Adamson (1987): Defendants must uphold the plea agreement or suffer the consequences. • Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978): A defendant's rights are not violated by a prosecutor who warns that refusing to enter a guilty plea may result in a harsher sentence.

Reforms

• On January 1, 2017, the State of New Jersey implemented Criminal Justice Reform (CJR), a sweeping set of changes to its pretrial justice system. With CJR, the state shifted from a system that relied heavily on monetary bail to a system based on defendants' risks of failing to appear for court dates and of being charged with new crimes before their cases were resolved. These risks are assessed using the Public Safety Assessment (PSA), a pretrial risk-assessment tool developed by Arnold Ventures with a team of experts.

2) PRETRIAL DETENTION

• People who are not released before trial must remain in jail. • Although most have cases adjudicated within six months, 15 percent of felony defendants wait more than a year. • Some would rather plead guilty than have an indefinite stay in jail. "As court systems increasingly rely on monetary bail to determine whether people will remain in jail or at liberty while their cases are pending, the number of people in jail awaiting trial has grown precipitously, even with crime rates at historic lows" -VERA Institute of Justice

• Bail Agents

− Only used by the United States and the Philippines − Private businesspeople who are paid fees by defendants who lack the money to make bail − Licensed by the state and can choose their own clients The bail agent will typically charge a non-refundable fee, usually a percentage of the total bail amount, in exchange for posting a bail bond with the court. − A bail bond is a contract between the bail agent, the defendant, and the court. The bond guarantees that the defendant will appear in court on the scheduled date and time, and if the defendant fails to appear, the bail agent may be required to pay the full amount of the bail to the court

Some of the vital functions of the jury in the criminal justice system:

− Prevent government oppression by safeguarding citizens against arbitrary law enforcement − Determine whether the accused is guilty − Represent diverse community interests − Promote citizens' knowledge about the criminal justice system through the jury duty process − Symbolize the rule of law

• Setting Bail

− The prosecutor may stress the seriousness of the crime, the defendant's record, and negative personal traits − The defense attorney may stress the defendant's good job, family responsibilities, and place in the community. − None of these factors genuinely speak to dangerousness, and there is great bias.

Circumstantial evidence

−Evidence provided by a witness from which a jury must infer a fact

Demonstrative evidence

−Evidence that is not based on witness testimony −Demonstrates information relevant to the crime, such as maps, X-rays, and photographs; includes real evidence

• Testimony

−Oral evidence provided by a legally competent witness

Real evidence

−Physical evidence such as weapons, records, fingerprints, and stolen property involved in the crime