Courtroom Workgroup Michael Huntoon CJA/204 Monday, April 28, 2014 Mr. Carlos Zuniga A courtroom workgroup is an informal agreement between the criminal prosecutor, defense attorney and the judge or judicial officer. The courtroom workgroup was introduced in 1977 by Eisenstein and Jacobs. Their idea was to explain their observation on how courts and lower level courts made their decisions on cases. Since the courtroom workgroup, drifted from the general public’s agreement of how justices worked. The workgroup has developed a set of accepted standards to continue its work and make daily life easier for its participants. The main concept of the courtroom workgroup is associated with plea bargaining. These courtroom workgroups show amazing explanations of power in overcrowded courts that are dealing with a large amount of cases. There are many groups that make up the courtroom workgroup; there are many roles that these individuals play within the group. The individuals within this group have frequent and ongoing relationships; they all interact in a wide variety of manners and even different settings. There are no changes that I would make to the courtroom workgroup. I understand that these individuals know exactly what they are doing and make changes every day. I believe that these individuals are doing what right for the public as well as the offenders is. The judges that are a part of this group has many different roles, some of which are to issues warrants, making a determination of probable cause in evidence, denying or granting bail to offenders, overseeing trials, making rulings on different motions and even overseeing hearings. The prosecuting attorney is the one who will represent that state in c... ... middle of paper ... ...on each case instead of only a couple minutes. References: 1) University of Phoenix. (2011). CJ Interactive Retrieved from: https://ecampus.phoenix.edu/secure/aapd/UC/CJ/index.html 2) Spiritus-Temporis.com. (2004). Courtroom Workgroup. Retrieved from http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/courtroom-workgroup/sources.html 3) Mays, G. L. (2013). American Courts and The Judical Process. Spiritus-Temporis.com. Retrieved from http://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199738854/author/ 4) USAID FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. (2005). Model Court Initiative Court Administration Reform Intervention Plan Annex 3.5 - Case Backlog Reduction/Purging Plans . Retrieved from http://www.usaidjsdp.ba/old_page/en/dokumenti/3%20Intervention%20Plan/Annex%203.5%20-%20Case%20Backlog%20Reduction%20Purging%20Plans.pdf
In addition to this, the analysis of law was not considered thoroughly during judicial decisions. Therefore, the court uses backward reasoning where it uses the expected results it wants to deduce to make decisions. Such activities in the justice department have a lot of impediments to the impartiality of judicial system. The rights of the criminal in many instances are affected by the use of such methods to deliver justice. According to Marshall, the legal analysis used to determine the outcome of the courts has reduced since the changes in the judicial system. The rights of the individuals have significantly reduced with the changes in the court system because only the nine judges are privy to the outcome of the court proceedings; they are also not liable to the questions that may be raised about the legality of their
“I think there’s just one kind of folks. Folks” (Lee 304). Harper Lee is the renowned author of To Kill a Mockingbird which was inspired by the real events of the Scottsboro Trials. Throughout her novel, Lee indirectly references the case by creating characters, events, and symbols that resemble and contrast the case. These elements allow the novel to emerge with a more realistic and historic plot. In particular, the similarities and differences between Judge Horton and Judge Taylor, Victoria and Mayella, and the atmosphere of the courtroom are most prevalent. By examining these components one will be able to respect the historical features present in Harper Lee’s fictional literary phenomenon, To Kill a Mockingbird.
the study takes place may have more of an effect on child Ps than we
Now, the district court system is the beginning step of the judicial system. A good amount of the case handled by the district court system is either criminal or civil trial cases. According to Roger Miller, “trial courts that have general jurisdiction as to the subject matter may be called county, district, superior, or circuit courts.” The majority of their cases are to be handled in-county first before proceeding further through the court system. Just as businesses and organizations have a chain-of-command or protocol system the government has the
Roberson, C., Wallace, H., & Stuckey, G. B. (2013). Procedures in the justice system (1st ed.). [Vitalsource or Kaplan University]. Retrieved from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781269223119/pages/76743177
The court system is composed of lawyers, judges, and juries. Their job is to ensure that everyone receives a fair trial, determine guilt or innocence, and apply sentences to guilty parties. The court system will contain one judge, and a jury of twelve citizens. The jury of the court will determine the guilt or innocence of the individual. The jury will also recommend a sentence for the crime the individual committed.
The judge presides over the trial proceedings and exercises those duties and power imposed by the law. Many of the decisions are solely at the judge’s discretion. However; the judge’s actions can be reviewed by an appellate of courts. In most of the states, there are District Court Judges. These are judges elected by the people in the county where they serve. These judges are attorneys with experience in the practice of law. There are also Inferior Court Judges
“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness for the Prosecution” was the use of the adversary system. Both sides of the adversary system were flawlessly protrayed when the prosecution and defense squared off in the courtroom.
As we all know that the judge has many responabilites. Some responabilites that the judge has that I have listed for this week assignments would be how a judge must make sure that all parties that is involved in the cases and all witness are present in the court room. Another responabilites that judge has is how the are accounted for upholding integrity and independence of the judiciary. ( Bohm & Haley, 2014, p.g. 276). It is also a judge responabilites to make sure that he or she rejects from any political activity. It is also a judge reasonability to set or reduce bonds during courts, make decisions on the verdict o cases, give out sentencing time. " The judge has five basic tasks. The first is simply to preside over the proceedings and
The jurors had several conflicts in disagreeing with each other and it didn't help that they would shout over one another. The very first conflict is when juror 8 voted not guilty against the 11 guilty votes. The other 11 jurors don't seem to want to hear this man out; they don't want to hear why he has voted not guilty. Some of these men, jurors 3 and 7, just want to get this case over with so they can get on with their lives. They don't think it is imperative enough to look over the evidence and put themselves in the place of the defendant. They get upset with this man and try to get him to vote guilty.
These judges are to judge the people righteously. Justice should be ultimate and should not be changed or distorted. The judges are also to not take bribes from anyone or be partial. This they should do because bribing shows perversion of the righteousness, which should not be something that characterizes the judges. The main objective of these judges should be to only pursue justice in order to be able to “live and possess the land which the Lord” is giving them (NASB Deut.
Explain problem solving court and their essential elements. Are they effective? “Many problem-solving strategies have been shown to be an efficient and effective use of court resources, resulting in increased positive outcomes, however, courts must exercise caution and seek to balance traditional versus problem solving-type roles “(Carey, and Munsterman,2008). Courts must be enthusiastic to acclimate some problem-solving lessons learned into conventional management. Implausible growth in problem solving court has developed. Problem solving court uses therapeutic jurisprudence to handle cases. According to the read section in unit two “problem solving courts five essential elements and they are immediate intervention, nonadversarial adjudication,
As I walked in and I went through the same metal detector. Same guard and lackadaisical nature. Same elevator and third floor. I quickly used the restroom and waited in anticipation for the doors to open to the courtroom. I was finally ready to use the notebook I had brought every time to get down the best notes possible for the assignment given so long ago. As the doors were opened the same jurors walked in and I recognized the judge and deputy assigned to this case from before. This time, I walked in after the jurors and sat in the very back right corner of the room. The room looked exactly the same as before but I did notice there was one other person in the room. I assumed it must be the prosecutor for the case. As I waited for everything
In particular, Gallas-himself a former court administrator-thinks that what judges and administrators do within courts is insufficient to explain case processing differences; as he states it, the "local legal culture pervades the practice of law and the processing of c...
For my field experience, I chose to attend a court case. On October 14th, 2015 I went to the District of Columbia court and watched a sentencing. It was not at all what I initially expected although after sitting in class for several weeks I was not shocked by it. What surprised me most was the informal, personal nature that the whole process had. The experience was interesting and I feel that I learned a lot from it.