Ultimately, the U. Supreme Court rejected the legality of these military commissions, ruling in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that they had not been authorized by an act of Congress and that they violated both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions. Congress responded to the Hamdan decision by enacting the Military Commissions Act of MCA , which authorized the president to identify enemies, imprison them indefinitely, try them in military commissions, and deprive the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear any habeas corpus cases filed by detainees.
Bush As a result, a number of enemy combatants have been released by order of courts reviewing their detention in Guantanamo Bay. Nearly three-quarters of the cases reviewed by federal judges concluded that there was insufficient evidence to hold the petitioners as enemy combatants and, therefore, ordered their release.
Geographical jurisdiction limits the power of courts to adjudicate disputes arising within certain geographic boundaries. Subject matter jurisdiction concerns the types of cases a court may hear and decide. Hierarchical jurisdiction concerns whether the court has the power to originally decide a case or review it on appeal.
Constitution, federal law, and certain cases between citizens of different states or different counties. Article I courts are tribunals created by Congress to handle specialized types of cases, especially those that arise under the regulatory law of federal agencies. Article III judges are nominated by the president and confirmed to office by the U. Article I judges are not; they are appointed for fixed terms.
Article I judges enjoy two protections to foster their independence: life-tenure unless impeached and a guarantee that their salaries can never be decreased. Article I judges do not have these protections. Thus, some of the continuances were caused by the six separate trials before the codefendant was finally convicted.
Other continuances were granted because of the illness of the police investigator. It was not until five years after arrest that Barker was convicted of murder. Court jurisdiction structure are intangible concepts but courthouses are concrete. From the outside, courthouses appear to be imposing government buildings, but on the inside they are beehives of activity.
Courthouses are places where you find lawyers arguing before juries, talking to their clients, and conversing with one another. But courthouses also employ numerous nonlawyers who perform vital roles; without clerks and probation officers, bail agents and bailiffs, courthouses could not function.
Lawyers often suffer from a negative public image, which is one reason the legal profession places considerable emphasis on legal ethics. Ethics refers to the study and analysis of what constitutes good or bad conduct Pollock Legal ethics represents a specific type of ethics. The three types of court managers include the clerk of court, the judge, and the court administrator. The clerk of court is responsible for docketing cases, collecting fees, overseeing jury selection, and maintaining court records.
The clerk of court is an elected official in most states and, consequently, will operate semi-autonomously from the judge. Thus, clerks of court have competed with judges for control over judicial administration. Judges are responsible for court administration, but they are generally not good managers due to a lack of training. In addition, judges are in charge of courtrooms and official court proceedings. Court administrators are professional managers who prepare annual reports, summarize caseload data, prepare budgets, troubleshoot, and help the court to run as efficiently as possible.
Relationships between judges and court administrators may be tense because the distinction between administration and adjudication is often not clear. Discretion is exercised at every key decision point within the criminal justice system. After an arrest is made, a prosecutor may decide not to file charges.
If charges are filed, a judge has discretion in terms of the amount of bail that may be set. If a case goes to trial, the jury will have discretion over whether to find a defendant guilty. These are just a few examples of discretionary decision making that may occur within the criminal courts.
Choices are made on the basis of legal judgments, policy priorities, and the values and attitudes of the actors involved. Other discretionary decisions may reflect policy choices; all crimes cannot be prosecuted because resources are limited.
More serious crimes will likely be prosecuted because they are considered a priority, while less serious offenses, such as disorderly conduct, may not. This right was designed to protect defendants from languishing in jail for lengthy periods of time before their guilt or innocence may be determined.
But, to date, no consensus has been reached about how long is too long, although the American Bar Association recommends that all felony cases reach disposition within one year of case filing. At the federal level, the Speedy Trial Act of amended in was enacted by Congress to specify time standards for two primary stages in the federal court process. A span of 30 days is allowed from arrest to indictment, and 70 days from indictment to trial. However, certain time periods, such as those associated with hearings on pretrial motions and the mental competency of the defendant, are excluded from time calculations.
While the federal speedy-trial law was enacted to protect the interests of society, speedy-trial laws at the state level are generally designed to protect defendants. Findings regarding the effectiveness of these laws have not been consistent.
Various researchers have found that speedy-trial laws have had a limited effect on speeding up case processing time in state courts. At the federal level, however, the results have been more promising. Researchers noted that it took several months for a criminal case in filed in federal court to reach disposition in By the early s the average federal case was disposed in less than three months. The most commonly advanced reason that criminal courts do not administer justice according to the textbook image is assembly-line justice.
Not only judges but also prosecutors, defense attorneys, and probation officers are in short supply. The court system remains grossly underfunded and understaffed today Broccolina and Zorza The strengths of the explanation. The assembly-line justice explanation highlights some important features of the contemporary courthouse. Because of the large volume of cases, overworked officials are often more interested in moving the steady stream of cases than in individually weighing each case on the scales of justice.
Particularly in large cities, tremendous pressures exist to move cases and keep the docket current lest the backlog becomes worse and delays increase. Law on the books suggests a justice process with unlimited resources, whereas law in action stresses an administrative process geared toward disposing of a large volume of cases. To cope with large caseloads, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges often apply several mass-production techniques such as specialization.
Another mass-production technique is group processing. During the initial appearance, felony defendants are often advised of their rights in one large group rather than individually.
Weaknesses of the explanation. This orthodox explanation stresses that excessive caseloads are a modern problem. However, American courts have been faced with caseload pressures for more than a century. The historical evidence must be ignored if one tries to explain how justice is administered in the courthouse simply in terms of too many cases resulting from the growth of big cities.
Emphasizing excessive caseloads also fails to consider the types of cases trial courts must decide. Most trial court cases present no disputed questions of law or fact. Rather, most case dispositions reflect routine administrationm requiring only processing or approving.
Most cases end with a plea of guilty not because the courthouse has too many cases but because the courts are confronted routine cases where the only major decision necessary is the sentence to be imposed. Cases studies clearly suggest that the criminal court process cannot be understood solely on the basis of excessive caseloads, because such an explanation omits too many important considerations—most especially organizational relationships and local legal culture Heumann ; Lynch ; Nardulli ; Roach-Anleu Judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys are representatives from separate, independent sponsoring institutions.
They are drawn together by a common task. As a result, courthouse regulars work together cooperatively on a daily basis in ways not envisioned by the formal adversary model Jacob ; Lichtenstein ; Lynch and Evans To understand the extent as well as the limits of this cooperation, we need to examine why courtroom work groups form in the first place and their impact on the administration of justice.
Each of the courthouse regulars is a representative of a sponsoring institution, which hires and fires them, monitors their activities, and rewards their performance. None of these actors can perform his or her tasks independently; they must work together. These interactions are critical because none of the courthouse regulars can make decisions independently; each must consider the reactions of others.
Each member of the work group can achieve individual goals and accomplish separate tasks only through work-group participation.
The actors share common interests in disposing of cases. Hence, cooperation—mutual interdependence—within the work group is viewed as leading to mutual benefits. Courtroom work groups reflect shared decision making. Judges retain the legal authority to make the major decisions, such as setting bail and imposing sentences, but they often rely on others. They routinely follow the bail recommendations of the prosecutor and accept guilty-plea agreements reached by the defense and prosecution.
This does not mean that the judge is without power; the other actors must be sensitive to what the judge might do. Prosecutors and defense attorneys know the amount of bail a particular judge has set in past situations, so that is what they recommend in the current case. This shared decision making is highly functional because it diffuses responsibility. Judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and others are aware that the decisions they make could turn out to be wrong. The members of the courtroom work group share a sense that when one of their members looks bad, they all look bad.
Decisions, therefore, are made jointly. The hallmark of work groups is regularity of behavior. This regularity is the product of shared norms about how each member should behave and what decisions are desirable. Courthouse workers can make their common worksite unpleasant, or, through cooperation, a predictable place to work. The greater the certainty, the less time and resources they need to spend on each case. Based on similarities among cases, members of the work group develop certain ideas about types of crimes and criminals.
These are referred to as normal crimes Sunow, Once a case has been classified as a normal crime it is usually disposed of on the basis of a set pattern. In essence, normal crimes represent a group sense of justice. Actors who violate these rules of personal and professional conduct can expect sanctions from the other members of the work group. A variety of rewards and sanctions are available. First, it is an example of applied ethics, in which ethical principles are applied to specific issues.
Legal ethics is also an example of professional ethics, because it involves the behavior of a profession, in this case the legal profession. All ethical systems, legal ethics included, have a moral component. But morality and ethics are different. Whereas morality emphasizes a set of moral absolutes, legal ethics involves the difficult task of helping lawyers sort out the best option when perhaps no good options exist.
Legal ethics is of critical importance because the American legal system is based on the adversarial system, which stresses verbal combat. At its basis, this system represents a fight between opposing viewpoints, and the use of legal ethics is one way to regulate this verbal combat to ensure a fair fight. Legal ethics emphasizes protecting clients by ensuring that they have competent attorneys to forcefully present their cases.
Legal ethics also seeks to promote public respect for the legal system. The law on the books approach to court delay focuses on resources and procedures. A common response is to supplement resources although budget realities often prevent doing so today. Emphasis is also placed on streamlining procedures. Research has, however, indicated that the level of court resources was not associated with court delay Church et al. Such findings explain why the law on the books approach is often ineffective in speeding up case dispositions and reducing excessive caseloads.
Speedy-trial laws are a case in point. Speedy trial laws are federal or state statutes that specify time limits for bringing a case to trial after arrest. They do not provide for any additional resources to aid the courts in complying. Potential difficulties arise because not all cases fit easily into the mandated time frames. Various studies find that such laws have had limited impact on court dely Church et al.
This is primarily because most state laws fail to provide the court with adequate and effective enforcement mechanisms. The federal speedy-trial law has proven effective. Researchers stress that law in action approaches to reducing court delay are ultimately more effective. Delay is related to the number of cases and the choices made by court actors in processing cases. Improving case scheduling and coordination among courtroom work group members are two such approaches.
The variability in courtroom workgroups has major consequences for how long it takes courts to dispose of cases. Research has found that some courts were characterized as hierarchical because there was a clear chain of command among judges, administrative staff, and courtroom staff.
Courts with a hierarchical culture processed felony cases significantly faster than other courts Ostrom et al. Speedy-trial laws reflect a law on the books approach to problem solving. Although these laws have the advantage of calling attention to delay as a problem, they are limited because they provide no mechanisms to deal with discretion.
Some speedy trial laws specify specific time standards for periods from arrest to arraignment, trial and or sentencing. These laws supplement the provisions of the U. Constitution and 35 state constitutions which have speedy-trial guarantees. The best-known such effort is the Speedy Trial Act of amended in , which specifies time standards for the two primary stages in the federal court process.
Certain time periods, such as those associated with hearings on pretrial motions and the mental competency of the defendant, are considered excludable time. Speedy-trial statutes exist in all 50 states Herman and Chemerinsky , but they have a different orientation from their federal counterpart. Most state laws are defendant-centered; that is, they are designed to protect defendants from suffering extensive delay, particularly if they are incarcerated prior to trial.
Speedy trial laws are not based on an analysis of why delay occurs. This can produce unforeseen consequences such as delaying civil cases in some federal courts.
Potential difficulties also arise because not all cases fit easily into the mandated time frames. A major murder case or a large drug-smuggling case takes longer to prepare than an ordinary burglary prosecution. Various studies find that such laws have had limited impact in speeding up the flow of cases through the state criminal court process Church et al.
The primary reason is that most state laws fail to provide the court with adequate and effective enforcement mechanisms. The average criminal case filed in the federal courts in the early s took 7 months to reach a disposition. Without adequate resources, however, speedy trials are doomed to failure.
Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Skip to content Selected: America's Courts and the…. Neubauer - Test Bank quantity. Previous Product. Category: Uncategorized. Appellate court decisions are always made by a group of judges; decisions are never made by a single judge. Appellate courts, like trial courts, may hear testimony from witnesses, conduct trials, or use juries.
Appellate court decisions must be unanimous. Legislative Court c. Court of Appeals b. District Court d. Constitution provides the basis for the federal judiciary? Article I c. Article III b. Article II d. They are nominated by the President. They must be confirmed by the U. They must reside in their district. They are appointed for eight year terms.. District Courts, with each state having at least one. District Courts and to replace the former position of U.
Whether or not a disabled person has the right to sue a restaurant for failure to provide access by a wheel chair. Whether or not a federally insured bank may manipulate the prime interest rate or collaborate with other banks to set rates.
Whether or not a person was denied a job because of their race. Supreme Court c. District Court b. Court of Appeals d. Supreme Court. Supreme Court the authority to invalidate an act of Congress as unconstitutional? Marbury v. Madison b. Article III of the U. Constitution c. The Judiciary Act of d. Courts of Appeals is made up of how many judgeships?
Circuit justices c. Appellate court judges Magistrate judges d. These include all of the following, except : a. Section and Bivens actions. A challenge of a criminal conviction based on the argument the trial was constitutionally defective. Allegations that prison officials do not allow inmates to practice their religion behind bars.
Courts of Appeals. Fradella, and Christopher Totten clarify potentially confusing and obscure legal matters using clear and concise explanations of criminal procedure law and the reasoning behind the law. They translate the complexity of the subject matter into simple, straightforward guidelines and recommendations, illustrated with interesting examples of actual cases. From individual rights to arrest, search and seizure, confessions, and pretrial identifications, this best seller provides students with all the information they need to understand the legal rights, duties, and liabilities of law enforcement professionals.
Important Notice: Media content referenced within the product description or the product text may not be available in the ebook version. Author : David W. This fascinating and well-researched book gives you a realistic sense of being in the courthouse, enabling you to quickly gain an understanding of what it is like to work in and be a part of the American criminal justice system. The book's approach, which focuses on the courthouse players, makes it easy to understand each person's important role in bringing a case through the court process.
Throughout the book, the authors highlight not only the pivotal role of the criminal courts but also the court's importance and impact on society as a whole. Author : Larry J. Students grapple with ethical concerns faced by agents of the criminal justice system in their professional lives, and are challenged to make informed decisions about what does and doesn't work in criminal justice.
Author : George Cole Publisher: Cengage Learning ISBN: Category: Social Science Page: View: Read Now » This classic best-seller, commonly referred to as The Eagle, encourages students to become better citizens and to determine what justice means in our society as well as what role individuals play in the criminal justice system. It challenges students to balance the mechanics and system of criminal justice with the human side of the story.
Cole and Smith present an exciting and relevant introduction to the field of criminal justice. The text combines solid research and intellectual rigor in an approachable manner with detailed attention to current and compelling events to help students appreciate the many aspects of the discipline, and how they can participate in the system as citizens of the United States.
Neubauer Publisher: Cengage Learning ISBN: Category: Education Page: View: Read Now » The premier choice for Courts courses for decades, this popular text offers a comprehensive explanation of the courts and the criminal justice system, presented in a streamlined, straightforward manner that appeals to instructors and students alike.
Neubauer and Fradella's crisp and clear writing, characterized by the organization of material into brief sections within chapters, ensures that readers gain a firm handle on the material. At the same time, the text's innovative courtroom workhouse model -- which focuses on the interrelationships among the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney -- brings the courtroom to life. Author : Randall G. While the second edition of Crime and Criminal Justice in American Society includes the most recent statistics on the police, courts, and corrections, its provocative, current examples also spur critical thinking about justice in the United States.
The authors offer an alternative interpretation of criminal justice rarely presented in traditional textbooks or by the media. They encourage readers to examine their beliefs about crime, punishment, and the law. Discussions in the chapters about how African Americans, Hispanics, whites, women, juveniles, the rich, and the poor experience crime and the criminal justice system contribute context for understanding different viewpoints.
The poor and minorities are the most likely to be caught in the net of criminal justice—but inequities have consequences for everyone. Reflection on various perspectives provides helpful input for assessing attitudes and for becoming actively involved with issues that have significant consequences. Eighteen thoroughly revised chapters present historical backgrounds, theories, and emerging issues.
New to the second edition is a chapter on veterans involved in the criminal justice system. Affordable, succinct, and engaging, this textbook presents the key concepts of the criminal justice system at less than half the cost of many competing textbooks. The author shows that bargaining in both countries is highly influenced by the respective legal systems - common and civil law.
The study also pays attention to current developments, changes and proposed legislation. Author : Steven M.
0コメント