Judicial Discretion and Ethical Boundaries
Brian R. Phinney
Saint Leo University
Judicial Discretion and Ethical Boundaries Judicial officers are afforded tremendous amounts of discretion in the execution of their duties. With this discretion comes an insurmountable amount of responsibility to exercise it with care, as a judicial officer’s decisions have life impacting results on those who they exercise their discretion upon. It is also very important that judges make ethical decisions and recuse themselves from cases in which their discretion may be compromised by personal bias in favor of any particular party they are presiding over. Knowing when, and having the fortitude to recuse themselves is often the key decision
…show more content…
Some examples of this would be if the judge had a lawsuit (current or prior) against a lawyer that is representing a client in a case in which the judge is presiding over. The judge in this case would have an obvious prejudice against the defendant’s lawyer and should recuse himself promptly. A second example would be if the judge were presiding over a case in which his nephew was the defendant. The judge would not be expected to have the ability to remain impartial when a close relative is the defendant in his …show more content…
Perhaps that he thought he could remain fair and impartial regardless of the tremendous campaign contributions he had received from the A. T. Massey Coal Company. Perhaps he elected to hear the case despite the plaintiff’s request for recusal because he felt he owed a favor to his campaign contributors. Regardless of the reasoning behind Judge Benjamin’s decision, the use of his discretion to preside over this case was a poor one that delved deeply into unethical behavior, to which the Supreme Court of the United States rightfully
When trying to describe Dan Locallo as a compassionate judge one could use the Tony Cameron, the Larry Bates and the Frank Caruso Jr. criminal cases. Tony Cameron has been in jail for only five months. He was arrested for armed robbery in August of 1997. Cameron has an inner conflict that he keeps fighting-whether or not he wants to plead guilty or not guilty (Courtroom 302, 26). Tony Cameron realizes that if he wants to present his case to the judge he better make it a good one. Most offenders that visit the courthouse feel like...
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Returning to the judicial world of the Bronx Family Court as a judge, after years of working in administration, Judge Richard Ross is astonished to find a distinctly more disjointed situation than the one he left. As he attempts to live out his life as “both the fact finder and arbiter of the law” it is clear the current judicial system does not serve him well (xv). Judge Ross conveys to the reader the fundamental issues of the Family Court system through his day to day happenings which range from endless caseloads to death threats. The use of personal experience is effective in adding credibility to more clearly convey his point that not only the Judges, but the case workers, 18-B attorneys, and various legal aides are overworked to a point
Riccardi, Michael (1998) “Dennis: Get Rid Of Challenges Without Cause” The Legal Intelligencer, Oct. 14: pg 1.
Roach, K. (2008). Dialogic Judicial Review and Its Critics. In D. Dyzenhaus, S. Reibetanz Moreau, & A. Ripstein, Law and Morality: Readings in Legal Philosophy (3rd Edition ed., pp. 589-644). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
pp. pp. pp Kay, H. H. (2004, Jan). Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Professor of Law.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
In this exercise the judge was morally wrong to oversee a case if they are or has been in a relationship with either side of the legal counsel as it creates a bias in his decisions however in the case in question all the evidence can be gone over by an outside party or transfer to another judge and counsel to see if the conviction was just
Judicial restraint is loosely defined as decisions or judgements that take a narrow interpretation of the constitution. It reflects a respect for the law as it has been enacted by the Legislature. Rather than creating new laws from broad interpretations. For myself, it is somewhat harder to distinguish what judicial restraint is. An example of judicial restraint would be the 1996 case of Bowers v. Hardwick. Hardwick was charged with violating the Georgia statute of sodomy by committing a sexual act with another male in the bedroom of his home.
Judge proves to be a noble man and I think the choice he made was the
Champion, D. J., Hartley, R. D., & Rabe, G. A. (2012). Criminal Courts: Structure, process, and
Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can lead to the denial of citizen rights. Strategies that control the use of discretion are, therefore, very important. The benefits and problems of police discretion and controlling strategies are the focus of this essay.
The ability of police to exercise discretion was originally designed to allow officers to maintain the peace by allowing certain types of crime to remain unpunished in certain circumstances. This essay will aim to explore the issue of police discretion that suggests that the application of discretion works against the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In drawing this conclusion, this essay will examine the relationship between policing ideals and the use of discretionary powers and the relationship between policing attitudes and the use of discretionary powers. A discussion regarding the use of police discretion towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can scarcely be mentioned without making reference to arguably the greatest failing by a police officer since indigenous Australians were formally recognised as citizens. Further to this, the case of Mulrunji Doomadgee (Cameron) will be examined from the point of view of officer discretionary powers. The penultimate point to be made will involve the Anglo Australian response to this case as well as the ongoing relationship between indigenous Australians and the institutions that govern them. As mentioned, the first point will involve policing ideals and their relationship to discretionary powers.
One contradiction in the job of the prosecutor is that they have nearly limitless direction in critical matters; however, prosecutors’ are also held to a very high ethical standard. Prosecutors must screen cases to determine which ones need to be prosecuted; nevertheless, this is the source of controversy with most people. “What makes charging decisions more intriguing and controversial is the fact that in making this decision, the prosecutor has nearly limitless discretion” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This means the prosecutor’s charging decisions are beyond any judicial review, so it must be apparent that a prosecutor
Many judges, whether appointed or elected, tend to serve for life. Often times, once they are in place, then it is very difficult to remove them. The advantage of having judges that are older is for their experience and wisdom. These judges are typically able to make sound judgments. They have obtained a degree of respect from their community and judicial colleagues. If a judge is able to maintain a sound mind and is physically fit to stay on the bench, then there should not be a cause of concern. However, with the aging process, the human body begins to decline. Unfortunately, sound judgment and memory begins to diminish. The body begins to weaken and it becomes increasingly difficult for a judge to keep up with the demand for the job. Often time than not, the judge is the one who decides when he should step down. If he a defiant person, then that decision will be a difficult one for him to make even though his stepping down would be for the betterment of all people. Most judges are able to continue serving even into advanced ages. As long as they are capable, then they should continue to do