NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
American Legal System The American Legal system has been a strong order of justice since our forefathers created it when America was being born. Since there are so many parts and processes of the justice system, it has been divided into different agencies and departments, to ensure that system works in a manner that is efficient as possible. Like any other country in the world, the Unites States has crime and has a way of defending and regulating its control with police, courts, and a corrections system. Although the American Legal System does not work as well as we would like, it seems as if the control of 295 million citizens is doing well. We have police, with firearms, patrolling our streets to answer our calls of distress 24 -hours a day, courts to handle each and every infraction of serious crimes, and a corrections system to punish offenders or try to rehabilitate them for release back to society. For over two centuries, the American Constitution established the foundation of democratic government.
It can undoubtedly be considered the strongest and longest lasting piece of document in the history of government. The Constitution, adopted in 1789, created a framework that secured the nations interests, promoted its commerce, and also maintained unity as a nation. Although ratifying it and building trust and confidence in it took a while, the foundation that the Constitution was built upon created a strong national government. This strong foundation or framework nevertheless is of great importance yet the secret to its success can be greatly attributed to the flexibility of the Constitution allowed by its structure. The Constitutional Convention, held in Philadelphia in May of 1787, led to the ending of the Articles of Confederation and the birth of the Constitution. It cannot be argued that the Constitution was the result of the failures of the Articles of Confederation.
The Articles of Confederation undoubtedly had good virtues but was concerned primarily with limiting the powers of the national government. Under it, Congress was given power to declare war, borrow money and trade but it left out two of the most important features that a strong government required: power to levy taxes and regulate commerce. Overall, the Articles of Confederation was merely a formality required after the Declaration of Independence. Not only was there no executive, there was also no judiciary authority and no means of enforcing Congress will.
If there was to be any enforcement at all, it would be done for the Congress by the states. Thus came the demand for a new contract or later called the American Constitution, simply stated: The people would give their consent to a strong national government if that government would in turn accept certain strict limitations on its powers. This exchange of power for limitations, also referred to as constitutionalism, is the main principle and relationship involved between the framers of the Constitution and the American people. Three principles that would be indirectly drawn from the Constitution is federalism, the separation of powers, and individual rights expressed in the Bill of Rights.
The first order of the American justice System starts in the community with the police agencies that govern the people of the country. Local cops, state police, highway patrol, the FBI, the ATF, and the U. S. Marshals, are all different policing agencies that help to control life in society and keep it sound.
The police are here to regulate all that is around us, from enforcing traffic rules, answering calls for assistance, probe suspicious circumstances, maintain a police presence in the community, solving domestic disputes and crimes, and at the most to protect and serve the community. Police have a variety of jobs that help to better the place we live. Through collaboration with other departments, today the police are working to find what causes crime and what factors we can use to prevent it. Policing is a limited business that has many restrictions to it as well. Before the police can catch a criminal, they have to have sufficient evidence or probable cause, which a crime has been committed or will be committed.
Probable cause to make an arrest could be for example, an officer making a traffic stop and seeing a handgun in the backseat of the car, or perhaps a search warrant, issued by a judge, permitting agents to invade a suspected drug dealers house. Without sufficient probable cause or evidence it is against the law for any police agency to inflict charges upon any one person. The Supreme Court case, Mapp v. Ohio (1961), dealt with establishing the principle that illegally obtained evidence cannot be used against a person in any case, meaning that evidence is void without probable cause or a warrant. Officers entered Mapps home to apprehend a suspect but seized evidence that had nothing to do with the specific case. Police gather intelligence through surveillance operations, complaints or tips from the community, and even suspicious behavior.
Police only involve their work with people if they believe that person can help them in gathering information about, and or solving crimes. The Police in our society have a hard job. The job of keeping hundreds of millions of Americans safe, sound and assured that there is a force that is protection us. This force is the first step in the justice system, the police are seen regularly in their cars or not at all, like the FBI, who work undercover, but they enforce the social problems of today and provide the courts information to process crimes in the justice system. The next step in the American legal system is the courts. The Constitution States in the Sixth Amendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witness in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Each town, county, state and even the Federal Government have courts to deal with the large amount of crime and infractions of the law we have everyday. Our circuit, county courts deal with the local, state, and federal problems immediately, while the appellate courts of each branch take the cases that already been decided upon, but will be tried again. Once someone is arrested they are held to determine if they should stay in custody or are released on bail to stand trial at a later time. That person has the right to a defense by a lawyer of his / her choice or they will be appointed one.
The judge and the prosecuting attorney decide what the charges should be and what penalties the defendant can receive. One specific case that has been a catalyst in the advancement of our Constitutional rights is Miranda v. Arizona (1966) which gave people certain rights when they are arrested. Ernesto Miranda was arrested but he was interrogated under the notion that he was not aware he was entitled to legal representation. This case informed suspects of their constitutional rights to silence, counsel, and protection against self-incrimination, which is insured by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. When someone is to stand trial for a charge, the decision to punish is determined by a jury of peers.
The jury usually consists of random citizens that are not associated with the defendant or case. This is to ensure that it is a fair trial and there are no discriminations. Preliminary hearings are set to make sure that there is sufficient evidence to support the charge on the individual. The case, Batson v. Kentucky (1986), held that prosecutors may not exclude members of one race from a jury because they believe they may favor a member of their own race. There are many aspects of the court system to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial such as the bill of rights and the intricate procedures that follow.
The last step in the American Justice System is the Department of Corrections. If one is convicted and sentenced, that person must be place in the required facility to punish or rehabilitate in some cases. Mandatory sentencing laws have been added to many states statues to possibly have a better effect on stopping individual crimes dealing with firearms and violence. Punishments come various in severity, from probation, in which ones behavior and progress is watched, to the death penalty, in which a prisoner is executed for his crimes. Punishments decided by the courts are determined by the severity and past history, especially criminal, of that individual. We have certain kinds of correctional facilities for each prisoner, such as jail, which holds people with sentences for less than one year, or state and federal prisons to hold for longer than one year and up to a life sentence.
Prisoners have limited rights and are denied the right of freedom through due process of the law and conviction. But prisoners do have some rights, like freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, medical treatment, mail, freedom of speech and religious practices, access to courts and counsel, and the due process for criminal proceedings. Some states today still enforce the death penalty for committing murder in the first degree. States in the South like Florida, Alabama, Georgia, California and almost ten others. There has been much controversy on the death penalty and its deterrent effectiveness over the years. Some may argue that the death penalty is legalized murder and some believe it to deter others from homicide.
Most states have abolished the death penalty statue from their legislature. Fear that the innocent will be executed in a mistrial, most of the states that have a death penalty statue contain several, and intricate, appellate proceedings that enable the convicted to appeal the death decision and seek acquittal. The Supreme Court has dealt with much controversy and debate on weather the death penalty is constitutional or not. It was considered a violation of the Eight Amendment since execution was rare and therefore an unusual punishment. The Supreme Court case, Fun v. Georgia (1972), illustrates a opposition to the penalty by overturning the death penalty statues as they were then applied for being in violation of the Eight Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.
The decision was for the states to have the ability to write their own death penalty or life sentence statues. Some citizens agree that the justice system does not work as fast and proper as it should. But limitations and the Constitutional rights that we have, make it a lengthy process to ensure that fairness is given to us all. From policing, to the courts, to corrections, there are many small steps and procedures that we amend and change every week, therefore making the justice system more adaptable to our society.
As time goes on, and things change, or legal system and laws will change too. The United States of America is a democratic republic, for the people by the people. And it is us, who in the future will determine what changes we must take in order to make this country a better place to live. In order to understand how important jury selection is, one must first understand the process of the selection. On the day of the trial, there may be as many as one hundred and fifty jurors called for examination and selection. Out of that one hundred and fifty, twelve will be selected as the jurors to try the case, with two alternates.
The hundred and fifty called, however, represented only a small percentage of the number of persons eligible for jury service. The one hundred and fifty, or smaller or greater number called for a particular case are referred to as the panel, and are selected from the jury lists of the County or Federal district in which the Court is located. Local laws, rules or regulations usually determine the number of jurors whose names are to be maintained on the jury list. The names on the jury list are usually selected from the registered and qualified voters, and the list checked at regular intervals to replace those who have died, moved away, or for some other reason become ineligible. Citizens who are selected for the jury list may be selected merely by having their names taken from the list of qualified voters, and being summoned to appear on a particular day, or they may be requested to appear at the office of the Clerk of Court to answer questions, or to complete a questionnaire.
In states and localities where there is a preliminary questionnaire or inquiry any juror who is disqualified, or exempt may state his reason for being excused and thus avoid being called again. Where there is no preliminary inquiry, the notice is mailed or observed by the sheriff, and on the return day the juror may state his reason for being excused. In some states the trial of complicated or difficult cases may be held before a Special Panel or Blue Ribbon jury. In New York for example, the Special Panels are used for murder cases, and the number of names to be included on a Special Panel for each country is determined by the Judiciary Law. The names for the Special Panel are selected by lot from the names on the general jury lists, and each person selected is called to the office of the Commissioner of Jurors to complete a questionnaire.
Among other questions, the applicant is asked whether he is opposed to the infliction of the death penalty, and whether he has any objections, in a proper case, to returning a verdict based on circumstantial evidence. If he is selected, his name is then placed on a smaller list of Special Jurors. Many objections have been made to Special Juries as unconstitutional, and as not representing a true cross section of the community. They are sometimes referred to as convicting juries, although public officials generally deny that there is any screening of the jurors on the bases of past performance. When a number of jurors must be called for the trial of a case or series of cases, the names of all those eligible to serve (excluding those whose recent service on one or more juries has entitled them to be excused for a period of time) are placed in a large drum or wheel, and the names of those to be selected are then drawn by lot. In important cases, the lawyers for both sides are entitled to be present.
After the drawing is completed, the members of the panel are notified to appear in court. At the opening of Court, the Court first calls for excuses, and the jurors who feel that they have a valid legal excuses for absence tell the judge the reason why they feel that they should not be required to serve in the particular case or cases. The judge will then listen to each excuse and make his ruling immediately. An excuse of sever illness in ones family, requiring presence at home will generally be sustained, while the fact that a juror had tickets to the theater or to a baseball game will not be valid. If a juror is engaged in his own business, and the call to jury duty comes at his busiest season of the year, he may be excused from the particular panel, without prejudice to the right of the Court to call him at a later date. Each excuse will stand on its own merit, and will be determined on the circumstances of the particular juror.
After the excuses have been disposed of, the jurors will be called to the witness stand or to the jury box to be examined under oath with respect to their fitness and qualifications to serve as jurors in the case about to be tried. This preliminary examination, at the trial, is referred to as the voir dire examination. It usually covers all matters, which tend to affect the ability of the juror to serve in the case, such as friend ship or hostility to either of the parties, personal acquaintance with one of the prospective witnesses, or an aversion to the type of case being tried. In some states each juror is placed in the witness chair, and after being sworn to answer truthfully the questions asked of him, is interrogated, and at times is furnished with information which will enable him to answer the questions asked of him. In other jurisdiction, twelve jurors are placed in the jury box simultaneously, and are then questioned. In most state courts the lawyer for the opposing side conduct the examination, and ask the questions, and the lawyers are free to suggest to the judge questions to be asked of particular jurors, or of the panel in general.
This process is important because it may reveal a juror could not conscientiously serve as a juror, or that there is some reason why he would not make a good juror. If, for example the prospective juror has been a friend of many years standing of the defendant, he could not be expected to judge impartially. On the other hand, if he him self has been injured in an automobile accident, he might be unduly sympathetic to the plaintiff in such a case. In criminal cases the lawyers will inquire whether the jurors have ever been the victims of a crime, since a man whose house had been burglarized might be prejudice in the trial of a defendant accused of the crime of burglary.
Free research essays on topics related to: american legal system, strong national government, american justice system, one hundred and fifty, supreme court case
Research essay sample on American Legal System Supreme Court Case
