Criminal Justice Final Study Guide


Vocabulary

  • Venire: a group of citizens from which the jury is selected

  • Voir Dire: preliminary questions the trial attorneys ask potential jurors to determine

  • Bench trial: there is no jury, so the judge decides your outcome

  • Challenges for the cause: The attorney must provide a sound, legally justifiable reason why a juror cannot serve

  • Peremptory challenges: The attorney can remove a juror without showing and supporting reason or cause

  • Direct evidence: any proof that directly establishes a fact without requiring any inference or reasoning.

  • Real evidence: Presented to the court in the form of exhibits; includes any physical items

  • Direct Examination:The prosecution calls all of its witnesses to provide evidence. The defense will then do the same

  • Cross-examination: the interrogation of a witness by the opposing party

  • Redirect examination: is the questioning of a witness by the attorney who originally called them, conducted immediately after cross-examination.

  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: The burden of proof needed to convict someone in trial.

  • Fourth Amendment: Protection against unreasonable searched seizure

  • Fifth Amendment: Due process of law

  • Sixth Amendment: Right to a fair and speedy trial

  • Seventh Amendment: Right to a trial by jury

  • Eighth Amendment: Prevention of cruel and unusual punishments

  • Opening Statement: Summary of what you will present during the trial.

  • Closing Arguments: Summary of the presentation and argues a case one last time

  • Lay witness: A person who testifies in court that is not an expert.

  • Expert Witness: A person who testifies in court that is an expert in a topic that is present in the trial

  • Self Defense: Legal justification that allows a person to use reasonable physical force to protect themselves

  • Necessity: Allows a person to commit an illegal act if it was done to prevent greater harm from occurring.

  • Insanity: A person cannot have the state of mind to commit the crime if he or she did not know the act of wrong.

  • Entrapment: Legal defense in criminal law asserting that law enforcement agents or government officials coerced, tricked, or persuaded a person into committing a crime they would not have otherwise committed.

  • Double Jeopardy: A constitutional protection that prevents an individual from being charged for the same crime twice

  • Jury Sequestration: Isolating jurors from the public, media, and their families during a trial.

  • Aggravating Circumstances: Facts surrounding a criminal act that increases its severity, cruelty, or culpability.

  • Mitigating Circumstances: Factors that reduce the seriousness of a crime or punishment

  • Discrimination: Unfair treatment of people based on characteristics

  • Capital Punishment: Death penalty

  • Discrimination: Unfair treatment of people based on specific characteristics (race, gender, sexual orientation, wealth class, etc…)

  • Retribution: Directly proportionate punishment meant to make offenders pay for their crimes

  • Specific Deterrence: Punishment intended to stop an offender from committing crimes again

  • General Deterrence: Punishment intended to disencourage others from committing by using a specific offender as an example

  • Reintegration: Helping offenders return successfully to society after punishment

  • Rehabilitation: Efforts to change an offenders behavior and prevent more crime in the future

  • Parole: Early release from prison under supervision

  • Probation: A sentence allowing an offender to remain in their community

  • Incarceration: Confinement in jail or prison

  • Community Service: Unpaid work in form as a punishment of a crime

  • Intermediate Sanctions: Punishments that are stricter than probation

  • Pennsylvania System: Prison system based on solitary confinement

  • New York System (Elmira Reformatory): A prison system focused on rehabilitation

  • Total Institution: Highly controlled prison facility

  • Prisonization: Adapting to prison culture

  • Deprivation: Loss of freedom

  • Expiration Release: Release after a full sentence.

  • Furlough: Temporary prison leave for a specific occasion

  • Ban the Box”: Removes criminal history box from job applications


Open Ended

  1. Identify and explain the standard steps in a criminal jury trial

    1. First, both sides undergo a venire to see the potential jurors in the jury pool. They then undergo the voir dire, which is the questioning of the potential jurors in trial. Attorneys could use challenges for cause of peremptory challenges during this time. Then, the opening statements concur which is a summary of what each side is going to present in trial. Then the prosecution presents their evidence (direct examination of witnesses), and after, the defense presents their evidence (cross examination of witnesses). Then they undergo the redirect, and then they present their closing arguments. Once that is all done, the jury will deliberate and reach a verdict.

  2. Explain what “taking the fifth” means and when your Fifth Amendment rights apply?

    1. "Taking the fifth" means exercising your right under the Fifth Amendment to remain silent and refuse to answer questions that might incriminate you. This only applies to spoken evidence, it does not apply to physical evidence.

  3. Identify and explain the basic protections enjoyed by criminal defendants during a trial in the United States.

    1. Criminal defendants have the right to not self incriminate themselves, they have the right to a jury of their peers, they have the right to a speedy trial, they have the right to not endure cruel or unusual punishments, and they have the right to testify openly.

  4. Contrast challenges for cause and peremptory challenges during voir dire.

    1. During voir dire, a challenge for cause is used when a potential juror shows bias or another reason they cannot be fair and impartial. There is no limit to the number of challenges for cause. A peremptory challenge allows attorneys to remove a juror without giving a reason, but the number of these challenges are limited.

  5. You are sitting on a parole board. The prospective parolee before your board is a convicted murderer who has served thirty-five years of a life-sentence. His crime was committed when he was thirty years old, so he is now a sixty-five-year-old man. What factors would you consider whether or not to grant this convict parole and why?

    1. I would consider his age because he is already an elder, and once a person becomes an elder, they are counting the days they have left on this planet. However, I would only consider this if the offender has shown immense guilt and remorse throughout his time in prison, because the most important thing is if the offender is showing remorse towards the victim, and their family. I would also take into consideration that he may become sickly as time goes on solely due to his age. As well as that. The most important factor would be whether releasing the inmate would pose a risk to public safety.

  6. Identify the main differences between probation and parole

    1. Probation is a sentence that allows an offender to remain in the community under supervision rather than going to prison. Parole is the conditional release of an inmate from prison before their sentence is completed. Probation is a replacement for incarceration, while parole occurs before sentencing is complete.

  7. List and describe the five sentencing options available to a judge besides imprisonment and probation

    1. Five sentencing options available to a judge are fines, which is when the offender pays money as punishment for the crime; restitution, which is when the offender compensates victims for losses or damages by the crime; community service, which is when the offender performs unpaid work that benefits the community; home confinement/house arrest, which is when the offender is restricted to their home, often monitored electronically; treatment or rehabilitation programs, which is when the offender is required to complete counseling, drug treatment, or other corrective programs.

  8. Compare the arguments for and against the privatization of the prison system.

    1. Supporters of prison privatization argue that private companies can operate prisons more efficiently and at a lower cost than the government, potentially saving taxpayers money. Opponents argue that private prisons prioritize profit over rehabilitation and inmate welfare, which may lead to lower-quality services, understaffing, and poor living conditions. An example of this is Rikers Island Prison, which is one of the worst prisons in the United States because it is a private prison.