final- judicial process

Summative essay:

Is the American judicial process just? Consider three key themes, elements, or concepts discussed during the semester in class or in the court text. Demonstrate how these elements demonstrate a political system which is just or not. To answer this question effectively, you will need to define your concept of justice and then apply it to you evaluation of the judicial system

In my eyes, justice refers to receiving the outcome deserved as a result of one’s actions.

Examples: plea bargaining, nolo contendre, prosecutorial discretion

Plea bargaining: Process through which a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge with the expectation of receiving some benefit from the state

Nolo contendre: Latin phrase meaning I will not contest it. A defendant’s plea of no contest in a criminal case means that he or she does not directly admit guilt but submits to sentencing or other punishment

Prosecutorial discretion: Power of a prosecutor to decide if, how, and when to bring criminal charges allowing them broad authority to choose between prosecuting, dropping a case, offering plea deals, or selecting specific charges, all to serve justice and manage limited resources

Bail

Security (money or bail bond) given as a guarantee that a released prisoner will appear at trial

Preventive detention

Holding a defendant in custody pending trial in the belief that he or she is likely to commit further criminal acts or flee the jurisdiction

Charging documents

Information, indictment, or complaint that states the formal criminal charge against one or more named defendant(s)

Grand juries

Group of citizens who decide if persons accused of crimes should be indicted (true bill) or not (no true bill)

Exclusionary rule

Judicially created rule holding that evidence obtained through violations of the constitutional rights of the criminal defendant must be excluded from the trial

Indictment

A grand jury’s formal accusation of a criminal offense made against a person

Probable cause

Standard used to determine if a crime has been committed and if there is sufficient evidence to believe that a specific individual committed it

Courtroom working group

Regular participants in the day-to-day activities of a particular courtroom. Members (judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney) interact on the basis of shared norms

Plea bargaining

Process through which a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge with the expectation of receiving some benefit from the state

Nolo contendere

Latin phrase meaning I will not contest it. A defendant’s plea of no contest in a criminal case means that he or she does not directly admit guilt but submits to sentencing or other punishment

Parole and good time

Early release from prison on the condition of good behavior

Reduction of the time served in prison as a reward for not violating prison rules

Sentencing discrimination

Illegitimate influences in the sentencing process based on the characteristics of the defendant

Sentencing disparities

Unequal sentences resulting from the sentencing process itself

Sentencing guidelines

Rules that attempt to reduce disparities and discrimination in sentencing by providing judges with a structure to guide their decisions

Types of sentencing: indeterminate

Sentence that has both a minimum and a maximum term of imprisonment, the actual length to be determined by a parole board

Types of sentencing: determinate

Term of imprisonment, imposed by a judge, that has a specific number of years

Types of sentencing: truth in sentencing

Laws that require offenders to serve their full sentences, or a larger percentage of their sentence before being eligible for parole

Types of sentencing: mandatory minimum

Require judges to impose fixed, predetermined prison terms for specific crimes

Types of sentencing: sentencing guidelines

Rules that attempt to reduce disparities and discrimination in sentencing by providing judges with a structure to guide their decisions

Types of sentencing: presumptive sentencing

System where guidelines establish a standard presumed sentence for a crime based on factors like offense severity and criminal history which judges must follow unless they find specific mitigating or aggravating factors justifying a different sentence

Compensatory damages

Money awarded to a person for actual harm suffered

Litigation explosion

Significant rapid increase in lawsuits and legal disputes especially in the u.s. seen as a societal problem where people increasingly turn to courts for issues one handled informally

Tort reform

Efforts to change laws governing person injury (tort) lawsuits aiming to limit litigation costs

Alternative dispute resolution (types)

Less adversarial means of settling disputes that may not involve a court

Default judgement

Judgment awarded to the plaintiff because the defendant has failed to answer the complaint

Pleadings

Process of making formal written statements of each side of a case

Summary judgement

Decision by a judge to rule in favor of one party because the opposing party failed to meet a standard of proof

Deposition

Process of obtaining a witness’s sworn testimony out of court

Motion

Application made by one of the litigants requesting the judge to make a decision

Prosecutor

Public official who represents the state in a criminal action

Reasoning by analogy

Method of applying principles or outcomes from a decided precedent to a new current case by identifying significant factual or structural similarities ensuring law remains consistent

Stare decisis

Latin phrase meaning let the decision stand. The doctrine that principles of law established in earlier judicial decisions should be accepted as authoritative in similar subsequent cases

Precedent (why overrule)?

Case previously decided that serves as a legal guide for the resolution of subsequent cases

Textualism

Method of statutory interpretation that asserts that a statute should be interpreted according to its plain meaning and not intent

Dynamic statutory interpretation

Meaning of a statute is not fixed at its enactment but evolves over time to reflect contemporary societal values, political changes, and new understandings, allowing laws to remain relevant despite linguistic and social shifts

Intentionalism

The laws of statutes are determined by the enacting legislators’ subjective law making decisions

Public choice

Views the policymaking process as a battlefield where legislators, bureaucrats, interest groups, and individual voters compete to maximize their own private interests

Canons of statutory construction

Judicial principles or default rules courts use to interpret the meaning of laws (statutes) acting as guiding tools when text is ambiguous including textual rules and policy based rules

Strict constuctionism

Form of judicial interpretation of a statute

Text of a provision in a statute should ne applied as it is written

Originalism

Text in law should be interpreted as it was understood at the time of its adoption

The original meaning of the constitutional text can be disconcerted from the most likely ideas of the text by the framers of the constitution

Non-Interpretivists

Are not strictly limited to the documents original text or the specific intentions of its framers at the time it was written

Attitudinal model

explains judicial decisions suggesting judges primarily vote based on their personal ideological attitudes, values, and policy preferences rather than solely on legal precedent or strict interpretation

New institutionalism

Studies how formal rules and informal rules shape individual and organizational behavior

Strategic choice

Refers to an attorneys deliberate key decisions guiding a case for client benefit balancing risks and goals

1983 suits and police violence

Primary legal mechanism allowing individuals to sue state or local government officials including police officers for police violence and other constitutional rights violations

Class action lawsuits

Lawsuit brought by one person or group on behalf of all persons to similar situations

Third party litigation funding

Legal practice where an outside investor provides capital to a party in a lawsuit to cover legal fees and costs in exchange for a portion off the recovery if the case wins

Discovery process

Pre trial procedure in which parties to a lawsuit ask for and receive info—such as testimony, records, or other evidence—from each other

Malpractice

Professional misconduct or the below standard performance of professional duties. Usually applies to suits against physicians and lawyers

The Michigan model

Process for handling medical errors emphasizing early open communication offering compensation if wrong and defending vigorously if right reducing litigation

Affidavit of merit statutes (Bok v. Berk)

Dismissal of the underlying medical malpractice lawsuit in federal court was appropriate because the plaintiff’s pr she complaint was not accompanied by the statorily required affidavit of merit

Prosecutorial discretion

Power of a prosecutor to decide if, how, and when to bring criminal charges allowing them broad authority to choose between prosecuting, dropping a case, offering plea deals, or selecting specific charges, all to serve justice and manage limited resources

Elements of a crime

Components that must be proven to establish a defendant’s guilt. They represent the action and thought behind a crime, and both must be present for an action to be considered criminal

Actus reus

Mens rea

Insanity plea

lack of criminal responsibility. A defect of reason caused by a disease of the mind such that a person did not know at the time of an act that the act was wrong and/or did not know the nature and quality of the act, according to a prevailing legal doctrine

Voir dire

French phrase meaning to speak the truth. The process by which prospective jurors are questioned to ascertain if there is cause to remove them from the jury

Challenge for cause

Request to disqualify a potential juror for specific reasons. Typical reasons include an acquaintanceship with either of the parties prior knowledge that would prevent impartial evaluations of the evidence presented in court, bias, obvious prejudice, or an inability to serve

Jury nullification

The right of juries to nullify or refuse to apply law in criminal cases despite facts that leave no reasonable doubt the law was violated