Puerto Rico Court System - Research Paper Example

Introduction Judiciary is a very important component in the society. It is the role of judiciary to ensure the rule of law prevails in the country. The judiciary is also charged with the responsibility of interpreting laws that govern a state. It is the work of the judiciary to provide a just and fair mechanism through which wrongdoers can have their cases assessed and rulings made in accordance to the constitution. Without laws, it would be hard to prove a case; hence, laws act as reference materials that enhance proper interpretation of cases presented to courts. It cannot be disputed that judicial systems are imperative, but these depends on how they are organized. This paper proposes a court system for the newly found Puerto Rico state. Background There are various weaknesses that could be acknowledged out of the current judicial systems and this is as documented by Griffin and Abbot (2006). Understanding the strengths and the weaknesses would undoubtedly go a long way in informing what should constitute a desirable judicial system. One of the strong points in Griffin and Abbot (2006) is that they develop a comparative approach to judicial systems, and this approach is advantageous because it does not only give examples of flaws in practice that should be addressed, but also some strengths that could be adopted, such as by newly established states. According to Griffin and Abbot (2006), U.S judicial system is constituted in a federal manner whereby each state within the federation has a different judicial system. Under the state court system, one is regarded innocent until proven guilty. This implies that the burden to prove one’s innocence lies with the state and not the person being accused. The system is made stronger because it is the responsibility of the state to find someone guilty thus making a person optimistic about their innocence prevailing. Another aspect of this judicial process is that, a criminal is assured of a fair, quick trial as well as enjoy the privilege of being judged by jurists. This means that not a single judge can decide on one’s fate, as it is the case in other countries. It also implies that a person, who is innocent has all the evidence evaluated prior to making the sentence. These elements are undoubtedly the strong points of judicial systems and inform any benchmark to constitute a desirable court system such as for a new established state. However, there is a limitation to this in the sense that much of the evidence may be suspended due to procedure. A cop collecting evidence must do so according to set down statutes otherwise, they could be done away with. In this case, evidence on tape cannot be taken into consideration if the accused was not aware that a recording was taking place as he was being interrogated by the police. This has led to guilty people walking away scot free for crimes they have committed. This is because passing of sentence is recommended by same panel of jurists who determined his or her case the process becomes fair. Furthermore, the process gives judges a lot of freedom when sentencing criminals. Reeves (2008), cites examples of cases where two people get different timeframes when they have committed the same felony. That tends to be one of the shortcomings of the state judicial process. The article proposes one guideline, neither should there be minimum nor maximum sentence .Unfortunately, discrimination when passing maximum sentence seems to be confined to black males, as the majority of the population gets fair sentencing. According to Reeves (2008), Jurisdiction hurdles are part of the limitations that hinder effective communication between various law enforcement agencies in a state. In this regard, there is need to develop a court system that checks on the discretion of the jury and the magistrates. There exist cases where a clash of overlapping jurisdictions contributed to severe conflicts amongst these agencies this involved the FBI, the undercover officers and the state police. There is a need to come up with a court system that addresses this problem, as well. Some states have a strong court system than other states, because the court system is led by each state’s highest court, which explains the law. This court also handles minor cases, where people feel dissatisfied with the sentence due to violation of their civil rights. Despite the fact that some criminals walk to freedom for felonies they have committed, it would be better to get a system which gives certain rights to those people accused of crime, for instance Miranda warning, then constitute a system which requires the accused to account for their innocence thus allocating judges the only power of determining their innocence or guilt. There also other weaknesses that also needs to be addressed. One of the weaknesses of most court systems is that they are not adequate for the population. This results in the postponing of cases, thus delaying justice. Some court systems overlap resulting in a situation where roles conflict. In this regard, there would be a need to have court systems defined .It has been cited that some courts are not fair because most criminals are left to go scot-free. This problem can be blamed on the incompetency of the lawyers and judges. States have court systems that are largely informed by Christian norms at the expense of Islamism. Reeves (2008) have indeed acknowledged all these weaknesses. The insights offered by Reeves (2008) are factual and can be used to constitute the court systems across various states in the U.S. The challenges facing legal institutions are real and a lot has to be taken into account if one is to come up with a judicial system that upholds the dignity of mankind. I feel that some form of legislation should be put in place to reduce conflicts amongst agencies of state law enforcement and also wash away disparities that negate delivery of justice equally to people across all races. Apart from that, states that constitute the larger U.S ought to have a harmonized law that governs the dispensation of justice this will reduce disparities that exist within the courts. Moreover, some of the elements of court systems that should be acknowledged is the principle of independence where states have their own court structure this makes it easier for the values of the state to be upheld. Another aspect of state court systems is that they are fair and just. This ensures that before a sentence is passed, the available evidence is critically evaluated. Lastly, the state court system should be aimed at protecting the rights of the accused, especially if evidence was acquired from them without their consent. I propose a court system that addresses these loopholes while inheriting the strengths. My proposed Puerto Rico court system assumes the structure of Ohio, Arkansas, and Georgia. I chose these states because they have an elaborate judicial structure that addresses the needs of the citizens, but I go further to make modifications. The court systems of these states have well defined courses of jurisdiction as well as mechanisms of resolving disputes that may occur in the course of delivering justice. PROPOSED PURTO RICO COURT SYSTEMS Puerto Rico City Courts City Courts will comprise of one hundred and eighteen courts together with ninety-seven judges. This would be adequate to serve the Puerto Rico city population immediately. This is because, I believe justice delayed is justice denied. This will go a long way in addressing problems pertaining to delayed cases. The main function of these courts will lie in overseeing small civil cases as well as criminal cases that occur in various cities across the state. Puerto Rico District Courts District courts will be comprised of one hundred and thirty courts together with one hundred and thirteen judges who are elected for a term of four years this will ensure that they complete the cases they are handling. There will be two categories of District Courts in the new state of Puerto Rico: State and Local. These courts will be limited in jurisdiction in the sense that they will tackle only cases relating to mistakes as well as violation of local decrees, preliminary crime cases and a few civil cases-possibly involving twenty five thousand dollars or to reduce pending cases. Another division will be created to handle small claims in relation to resolving contracts and individual property issues, which do not exceed five thousand dollars in order to reduce overlap while introducing the aspect of specialization, which amounts to effectiveness Griffin & Abbot (2006) suggests that court cases are more fair and transparent when presided by specialized judges and juries. Puerto Rico Circuit Courts Circuit Courts will comprise of one hundred and fifteen circuit judges, and each will be elected to serve for a term of six years in another court structure defined in the Puerto Rico Constitution is the Circuit Court and it handles general jurisdiction issues. The Puerto Rican Circuit Courts will be assigned twenty-eight specific territories within the state which will be divided into five major areas that will be responsible in overseeing cases relating to crime, civil, probation, domestic relations and delinquent law for juveniles. Puerto Rico Court of Appeals The Appellate Court will comprise of one Chief Justice and eleven judges who will be elected to serve for a term of eight years. The main reason for creating the Puerto Rican Appellate Courts was reduce the workload which the state Supreme Court could handle. The court will be hearing appeals ranging from civil to criminal cases. There will be seven districts in the new Puerto Rican state, and cases involving these districts will be handled by corresponding judges so that they can be available to all the districts. Puerto Rico Supreme Court The highest court in the new state will be the Supreme Court and it will comprise of seven judges, six associate judges and a single chief judge so that he can oversee the effective conclusion of cases. Powers and jurisdictions of the new Puerto Rico Supreme Court will be defined in the Constitution of Puerto Rico, this will make the court to become the final appellate jurisdiction as well as have administrative power on other constituent courts within the state in order to effectively monitor their functioning. Additionally, the court will be mandated with the administration of professional conduct of state attorneys. Jurisdictionally, this will mean that the court handles cases on appellate basis, and this makes it to be a court of final resort, meaning that after a sentence has been upheld it cannot be revised by any other court even the federal Supreme Court. The new court system will ensure that the principle of discretion among judges and magistrates is respected. This will be facilitated through state legislation. On the case of human rights, the new court system will ensure that all accused persons are treated equally by creating a section for handling human rights related cases. Finally, the new court system will create Kadhis Courts to cater for Muslim cases. Conclusion Having looked at weaknesses as well as strengths of court systems, I feel that the proposed court system will be appropriate to the newly found State of Puerto Rico. This is made possible by the fact that the proposed court system will address weaknesses and deliver justice to the population of Puerto Rico State. The proposed court system for the new state of Puerto Rico will comprise of five State Courts together with two Federal Courts one for eastern district and another for western district. The structure of the courts is arranged in an ascending manner beginning with City Courts and ends with the Supreme Court. The highest court is the Supreme Court would be the final court of resort, whereas the lowest court will be the City Court. Functions of these courts are outlined well and will address these weaknesses; discriminative and selective justice, incompetency amongst judges and lawyers, postponement of cases and delayed justice. References Gervin,B.(2010).The U.S judicial system. London .Oxford University press Reeves, T. (2009). ‘Court of Appeals. Arkansas Judiciary’ Retrieved February21, 2013. https://courts.arkansas.gov/courts/court-of-appeals/judges Sheehy, P (2002). Arkansas State Laws. Judicial Review, 2:1-16 Read More