Criminal Justice Process for a Felony Criminal Charge Filed - Research Paper Example

Criminal justice process Introduction The United s is the leading democracy and economy. As such, the country strives to safeguard the rights and privileges of every citizen. Every state has a systematic criminal justice system that ensures upholds the dictates of both justice and dignity for both the victims and suspects of a crime. The process consists of a number of serious activities undertaken by professionals who ensure that they provide satisfactory closure to the criminal cases in the states while according the suspects the desired justice, fairness and dignity (Gibson, 2002). The criminal justice processes in the various states in the country are constitutional and run efficiently with the view to providing justice to all the parties involved as discussed in the essay below. Investigation Investigation is the preliminary stage in the process. After the victim of a felony files a charge at a state court, the police begin carrying out an extensive investigation with the view to constructing a case. The process of investigation may always require search warrants coupled with warrants of arrest whenever necessary (Porto, 2009). The police investigate the nature of the felony and interview witnesses. This way, they gather adequate evidence and record eyewitness accounts of the crime. Evidence and witnesses are vital in proving the guilt of a suspect. While carrying out the investigations, the police must uphold the rights of everyone involved including the suspect. The police can interview everyone and search every place they deemed appropriate. However, they must do these lawfully often-seeking search warrants from the courts in order to search the premises of a suspect. Arrest After carrying out an extensive investigation, the police determine a probable cause, which then instigates the arrest of the suspect. Probable cause is the reason the police have to believe that a suspect could have committed a crime. They take the suspect into holding as he or she awaits the court. The law enforcers can arrest a suspect either in a public space or in private where they must always have a warrant. After arresting a suspect, the constitution demands that they must charge the suspect in a court of law within the first forty-eight hours or release the suspect. The process of arresting a suspect is equally systematic with the police upholding the constitutionality of the entire process. An arresting officer must identify himself to the suspect. In some cases, the officers may require a warrant. Additionally, the officer must read out the Miranda rights to the suspect. The rights inform the suspect on the need to stay silent since the prosecutor will use anything he says in the court. This way, the suspect does not incriminate himself. Complaint, information or indictment Either before or after arresting a suspect, the law enforcers file criminal charges depending on the state. The enforcers initiate the criminal justice process by either filing written charges called complaint or information. The law enforcers can, therefore, hold the suspect further as they await such further processes as arraignment in court or the settlement of a bail. In a large number of states and even in the federal system, the justice system employs “the indictment by a grand jury” method. According to the method, a jury that consists of citizens analyzes the evidence and eyewitness accounts before determining the existence of a probable cause. Other states use the preliminary hearing method in which a judge analyzes the nature of both the evidence and the witness accounts thereby establishing the existence of a probable cause in every case. The result of the processes is always a document that proves the existence of a case but not the guilt of a suspect. This implies that suspects remain innocent until the courts prove them otherwise (Neubauer & Meinhold, 2013). Arraignment Arraignment also known as preliminary hearing in court just as the name suggests refers to the formal presentation of the charges to the court. During the arraignment, the judge of the court reads out the charges to the defendant. The defendant who is the suspect pleads either innocent or guilty. The defendant’s lawyer is present at the time and may always take the plea depending on the arrangement between the lawyer and the defendant. The American constitution accords every suspect a state attorney. The provision is in accordance with the constitution that safeguards the right to fair hearing. An attorney advises the defendant thereby influencing the nature of his or her plea. Bail The state and federal justice system provides every defendant the right to attend the court proceedings from their homes. The right to bail is in accordance with the constitutional provision that accused individuals are innocent until the courts prove them otherwise by a court of law. A bail is, therefore, a property or money that the accused presents to the court to act as a security and proof that he or she will attend al the court proceedings, trial, and sentencing (Roach, 1999). The constitution provides the suspect with the freedom to pay the bail in the form of cash, bail bond or a property. A bail bond is a unique arrangement that permits a bonds-person to pay the bail for a defendant at a fee. While the Constitution states that every suspect is innocent until proven guilty and that every defendant has the right to a bail, the court reserves the right of releasing a defendant on bail. The judge considers the factors of a case. In case the victim flees the trial owing to the seriousness of the sentence or in case the judge fears for the safety of the suspect, they deny bail. As such, they order the law enforcers to continue holding the suspect until the end of the judicial proceeding. Plea negotiation Just as the name suggests, plea negotiation is a process where the lawyer bargains with the prosecutor to determine the nature of the evidence. Through the plea bargain process, a defendant may either plead guilty to a section of the charges or plead guilty to a lesser crime than those in the complaint. Such is an extensive legal process as the lawyer, and the prosecutor analyzes the nature of the evidence. The process is vital since the law requires the prosecutor to reveal a variety of information to the defense lawyer. The information includes vital evidence and witness accounts. As such, the lawyer can plan his defense thereby coming up with a suitable bargain. In case the defendant pleads guilty, the judge reads out a number of rights and privileges that he stands to lose before giving him a second chance to plead. Additionally, the judge may require the defendant to narrate the “factual basis for the plea.” This includes the court compelling the defendant to explain intricate features of the crime to help prove his guilt. Trial The proceedings go to trial only if the court fails to reach a plea. The constitution dictates that the trial occurs speedily in order expedite the dispensation of justice to both the victims and the suspects. For crimes punishable by six or more months, the defendant enjoys the right to a public trial by a grand jury. However, the defendant has the freedom to waive the right thereby admitting a trial by judge. In such a case, the judge or a bench of judges, in case of a bench trial analyzes the evidence and witness testimonies thereby determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant. In case the defendant selects the trial by jury option, both the defendant and the prosecutor may object the choice of potential jurors based on their ability to maintain objectivity in the analysis of the facts of the case. The right to peremptory challenge enables both the defendant and the prosecutor to contest the involvement of any individual juror. Verdict After the creation of an objective jury, the jury retires in private and considers the facts of the case. The analysis should be extensive and in-depth with the view to eliminating any reasonable doubt. The deliberation occurs in secrecy and may take hours, days or even weeks depending on the nature of every case and the evidence they must analyze. When they reach a verdict, they read their findings to the defendant in public and give reasons for the verdict. The verdict is always complicated depending on the nature of the case. A jury can, for example, find the defendant guilty of all the charges, a section of the charges or a different charge altogether. They reach their verdict by deliberating on the facts of a case. They do so by analyzing the evidence and the eyewitness accounts. Effective deliberations systematically validate or disapprove the evidence thereby building a verdict systematically by eliminating reasonable doubts. The fact that they read their verdict and the supporting evidence provides both the prosecutor and the defendant’s lawyer an opportunity to follow the process effectively (Carp, Stidham & Manning, 2014). Incase of a “not guilty” verdict, neither the prosecutor nor the court can overturn the decision. Incase of a guilty verdict, the defendant has the right to appeal the ruling by proving errors that occurred in the process of determining the ruling. Appeal The American constitution entitles every defendant found guilty to an appeal. As such, the judicial system in the country consists of a number of multi-level appellate courts. The Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal and hears appeal cases from the middle-level courts of appeal. The defendant from the above court may, therefore, appeal the guilty verdict by presenting a unique case against the jury. The defendant has numerous potential reasons for the appeal and must, therefore, select the grounds carefully with the view to gaining the maximum benefits from such appeals. Key among such grounds is a legal error that either the bench of judges or the jury committed while analyzing the evidence in the case. The errors may always include the use of inadmissible evidence. Such is an evidence the prosecutor collects irregularly. As explained earlier, the constitution stipulates the roles of the law enforces clearly and provides a suspect with a number of rights. Key among such rights is that a suspect should not always incriminate himself. McConville & Wilson (2002) explain that the Miranda rights oversee such. In case a law enforcer dupes a suspect into an interview and uses such evidence to prove the guilt of the suspect, the constitution grants individuals the right to appeal the verdict. Lack of satisfactory evidence to support the verdict is yet another error that a jury can always commit. As explained earlier, the jury must always prove their verdict beyond any reasonable doubt. This requires the provision of sufficient evidence thereby providing a realistic verdict by proving the guilt of the defendant. Another equally significant error that juries can commit while making a verdict is a mistake that a judge makes while giving a charge to the jury. Such may include overruling the defendant’s rights to object the presence of an individual juror. Additionally, the defendant can appeal a ruling based the jurors’ misconducts. Conclusion The American constitution creates a systematic judicial service by observing the basic rights and privileges of the people. The judicial process discussed above covers the uniqueness of every case and strives to uphold justice and fairness to ever party involved in a legal tussle. The constitution provides both victims and suspects with numerous rights and appropriate strictures that help uphold the rights. After reporting a crime, the law enforcers must carry out an extensive investigation on the report. Such is a vital process that shows the government’s interest in creating a safe and secure society for every citizen. While the victims of the crimes have such rights, the suspects of the crimes also have a number of rights. The rights ensure that the state does not punish innocent individual. The judicial process is rapid yet thorough thereby dispensing effective justice to the society. Defendants have the rights to have an attorney. In case one cannot afford a private lawyer, the state provides one for them. This enhances the quality of the judicial process since it improves the ability of every individual to understand the case. The Miranda rights and the rights to appeal a ruling coupled with the speedy nature of the process ensures that the process is both efficient and effective. References Carp, R. A., Stidham, R., & Manning, K. L. (2014). Judicial process in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press, an imprint of SAGE Publications. Gibson, B. (2002). Introduction to the criminal justice process. Waterside Press. McConville, M., & Wilson, G. P. (2002). The handbook of the criminal justice process. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Neubauer, D. W., & Meinhold, S. S. (2013). Judicial process: Law, courts, and politics in the United States. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Porto, B. L. (2009). May it please the court: Judicial processes and politics in America. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group. Roach, K. (1999). Due process and victims rights: The new law and politics of criminal justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Read More