It 2“prevents prosecutors from repeatedly bringing charges against a defendant in hopes of eventually getting a guilty verdict” .This gives the accused once acquitted or found innocent a sense of security as they can move on with their lives without worrying about being retried. The principles of double jeopardy and the law still being used do have
Memorandum To: Ms. Singh From: Clark & Clark Attorneys Date: July 26, 2015 Subject: Misdemeanor vs. Felony Ms. Singh, you have expressed your concerns about the possibility of a long prison sentence and possible capital punishment after being arrest for breach of peace in which is classified as a misdemeanor not a felony. This memo will explain the differences between a felony and misdemeanor, and inform you on all the facts on your case. The report stated that your boyfriend became jealous and punched the other man. Nevertheless, this memo is going to explaining your arrest only, if in fact you are convicted for the crime of breach of peace.
“In courtrooms around the country, more than nine out of every ten defendants surrendered any chance of acquittal, abandoned the constitutional right to a jury trial, and asked courts to enter judgments against them” (Gilchrist, 2016, p. 611). Plea bargaining is a complicated part of the criminal justice system. Negotiations happen before or during a trial and often the exact details of a plea bargain are unknown to anyone beyond those who are directly affected. This system can work to the advantage of criminal defendants and their attorneys, but also can lead to abuses of the system on the part of the defense, each of which I will address in turn. First, from a legal standpoint, the ubiquity of plea bargaining has led to its recognition
Under the Rockefeller Laws, a person convicted of a single sale of two ounces of cocaine faces the same mandatory prison term as a murderer, fifteen years to life, despite the fact most offenders are nonviolent drug dealers or buyers. Of those arrested for drug offenses, many never took a formal trial. About 98 percent of all drug convicts would instead appear in front of a prosecutor, accepting a minimum they could not get lowered. If they were found guilty in trial, they would receive a higher sentence, many never took the risk. In jail, blacks convicted of drug offenses would serve their prison sentences alongside murderers, and rapists, serving virtually the same amount of time.
Lying to a federal official is considered a felon which can result in imprisonment. Finding alternate consequences for these non-violent crimes can reduce prison population. The Department of Justice provides $27.4 billion to fund enforcement needs and prisons. Some of this money could be used to fund education in the United States. Government grants only cover so much of a student’s tuition.
As though it is not a fundamental right to have an appointed counsel to those who cannot afford one, Betts v. Brady did bring up rather valid points. The Court goes back to the foundation of our “adversary system.” It claims that a person whom has no funds to obtain an attorney is more likely to have an unjust trial. The court states that much money is used to charge or “accuse” defendants of crimes they may or may not have committed. Prosecutors which are lawyers of the government are to be looked at as a necessity to keep public order. However, it does not make sense that only prosecutors can keep public order without the publics best interest in a poor individual.
A “Plea bargain” is an agreement between the prosecutor, the defendant’s attorney and the defendant. In return for the defendant entering a plea of guilty to a criminal charge, the prosecutor agrees to recommend to the judge a particular penalty. Plea bargaining allows the prosecutor to obtain guilty pleas in cases that might otherwise go to trial. The prosecution is relieved of the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt at trial and the defendant receives a specific resolution of the charges against him. The volume of cases in the criminal justice system and the limited resources to prosecute cases in court have led to a growing use of plea bargains to resolve criminal cases.
However, if one of you confesses and the other does not, the one who confessed goes free, as a reward for helping the police, and the one who remained silent spends 20 years in jail! What would you do? When faced with this decision, the majority of people chose to confess, resulting in both players going to prison for ten years. That is because of the following reasoning: Player 1 thinks, "Well, my partner can either confess or remain silent. If he chooses to confess, I can
Although the rationale of peremptory challenges, ironically, would be for the defendant and the prosecution to get rid of any potentially biased jurors, lawyers may instead use their peremptory challenges to form a jury that would pass a more favourable verdict. As lawyers are also not required to explain their decisions in striking out jurors in most cases, the makeup of the jury can thus be heavily imbalanced. However, as a judge would be required to not let any preconceived bias affect the administering of justice, the accused would hence receive a fairer treatment as compared to juries that might have any bias towards either the prosecution or the defendant. With juries also not being required to explain their decisions, any bias that the jury might have would not be easily found and challenged. Especially in cases where the death penalty is concerned, it is all the more important that juries mete out a fair verdict.
According to law, if someone of legal age happens to obtain an affair with a minor they must register as sex offender. Most of the time they get by using technology to try to keep it quiet or a secret. Investigators first place to look when a complaint is filed is through social media and cell phones. It has been a huge discussion on how to sentence teachers for having affairs with students. Teachers however, shall suffer a greater sentence due to the fact that they educators of the state.
Law seems to be a solid and fixed rule that everyone follows, but as I become more and more aware of it, I started to think it is not the matter of following it, but the matter of interpreting and manipulating it. Even with the same clause, it can be applied in million different ways. Since it is based on words, rather than what it says, how it says matters more. I could see it in the trial too; the prosecutor was emphasizing the valuable those metal scraps were, the defense attorney kept referring to them as trash. Also, the defense attorney claimed it’s very hard to go beyond a reasonable doubt, while the prosecutor asserted it is not impossible to reach it.