Representative Cross-Section of the Community - Assignment Example

Weekly Assignment Jurors are normally selected from citizens who have registered as voters or who those with registered motor vehicles. Do these methods generate juries drawn from a “representative cross-section of the community”? Propose a better way of choosing jurors? In most judiciary systems, it is axiomatic for just trials to prevail; therefore, strict adherence to procedural safeguards is critical in this criminal justice system. One fundamental safeguard is the 6th amendment guarantee. This is where an impartial jury from the state where the crime was committed, tries the criminal defendants. The Supreme Court requires the jury chosen to select a representative from a cross-section of the community of individuals registered as voters in the state or have registered automobiles (Scheb, 2011). This juror selection method has had numerous complaints about racial discrimination in the choosing of potential jurors. This has forced developed states to provide computer automation in the jury selection process. This computerized method is appropriate since it focuses on a good representation of the community. A country can combine forces with a private business or another local regime to get this electronic jury selection (Scheb, 2011). The mechanical jury selection can also apply in the selection of the jurors. This method includes a listing of qualified persons whose database is stored in a grand jury box. The selection is carried in a manual method whereby the databases are picked randomly. This is also an acceptable method. 5. Most evidence rules functional in jury trials are consequential from the early common law, when jurors were amateurish. These sets of laws were designed to avert jurors from hearing evidence that might prejudice their verdict in the case. Given the educational standards in the United States, should this system be made less restrictive regarding proof that can be offered in courts? What constitutional challenges would crop up by allowing rumor evidence to be filed against a defendant? Criminal arbitration is a core feature in the social life of citizens, in the United States. Amidst this fact, an essential objective of the criminal trial is to determine facts related to the defendant’s guilt. The trial is aimed in distinguishing between the innocent individuals and the literally guilt (Scheb, 2011). These sentiments can only be achieved through a professional approach. A drawback in the past clearly shows that the rules applied in the jury trials were formed by amateurish jurors. Basing on the current educational standards of the jurors in the United States, these rules should be revised again. The final verdict ought not to be in favor of the American jury like in the past. The limits of this effect ought not to be overlooked. This is because in the past, the jury sitting formed rules, which prevented them from prejudice hearings that would affect their judgments. These laws should be made less restrictive to allow evidence from the defendants to be presented so that the judgments made are accurate. This prevents problems relating to the constitution since; deprivation of freedom of expression is against the law the American constitution. 7. Should a trial judge be permitted to précis the confirmation for the jury’s benefit prior to the jurors before they deliberate? What merits and demerits are present in such a practice? Would it be lawful? The way the jurors view an individual will influence the evidence they present in line with the arguments made. Obviously, the opening statement that individuals make plays a vital role in determining the individual’s credibility and character (Scheb, 2011). Trial judges should be able to summarize the evidence from the defendant’s side so as allow the jury sitting to deliberate effectively on the judgment to be made by the court. This practice is both advantageous and disadvantageous at the same time. Normally, in states that allow lawyer participation, the defendant is supposed to make a pretrial showing to the trial judge regarding relevant evidence. However, the trial judge can accept or deny this consideration. Law breakers find it hard to gain justice during the hearings in the court of law. Furthermore, it proves advantageous in that the jurors will have all the information required to make a justified ruling in time. This can only be granted constitution wise depending on the laws of the judiciary in different states. The jury sitting is being improved to preserve the right to jury trial and participation especially in the United States. 2. How can an inmate on death row establish that his or her death sentence was the outcome of racial discrimination? Racial discrimination is a paramount concern in many states. A court of law can impose a death sentence (also capital punishment) at the counsel of the jury. Individuals cannot be excluded from a jury due to their race (Scheb, 2011). In most jurisdictions, the most vital decisions in a capital case are made by the district public prosecutor who is mostly from the white community. Often these decisions made replicate chauvinism from the prosecutor and the community. Most police departments investigate crime in the white community more aggressively than in the black community. According to some studies, race can also influence cases chosen for capital punishment. The race of the victim, the defendant, the jurors and the prosecutor all come into play in the death penalty issue. In fact, disparities of the race of a victim have been found in most states attributing to about 82% of the deaths. Moreover, significant statistical research exists regarding the death penalty and race factor. Through further studies, race plays a crucial role in decisions made for capital punishment in most jurisdictions. 6. Suppose one is a probation officer and a judge asked him/her to counsel probation conditions for a first-time lawbreaker convicted with the sale and custody of cocaine. What precise conditions would one suggest? Probation is a substitute for imprisonment which is authorized by the United States Code unless for felony crimes (Scheb, 2011). First-time domestic violence offenders are authorized to probation if not a jail-term sentence. Probation is not considered a pardon of any kind, but rather a punishment of a mild nature. Such a condition related to cocaine sale and possession requires compliance with drug tests. As a probation officer, the probation term of an individual caught in possession of cocaine lies between 1 to 5 years. This is because possession of hard drugs constitutes a felony crime. There are mandatory conditions to be met by every offender which include a drug test and submission of a monthly supervision report within every first five days of the month. This report bases particularly on the day-to-day activities carried out by the offender who in this case is a drug peddler. The offender is also liable to travel restrictions and also a monetary fee which is mainly imposed by the judge. 10. What is the basis for granting only minimal due process rights to parolees and probationers and to prisoners in disciplinary proceedings? Due process is applicable, but, since prison disciplinary proceedings are not part of criminal prosecutions then the full panoply of human rights of a defendant is not available. Parolees and probationers remain in legal custody until stated otherwise by the prosecution board. Inmates may still seek protection in the eighth amendment or the state’s tort law. Moreover, this due process is not concerned at all by slack deprivation of mortality, freedom or the offender’s property by the prison officials (Scheb, 2011). The basis of granting minimal due process is based on the fact that the parolees and probationers are offenders of the tort law according to common jurisdictions. The court in this case promulgates due process on standards that direct the imposition of discipline on inmates (Scheb, 2011). The disciplinary proceedings in prisons may also limit due process in case the crime committed by the inmate was a felony of higher degree. The determination of whether the due process requires a hearing before a prisoner is transferred from an institution to another with close analysis of the applicable statutes and regulations as well as consideration of harm suffered by the transferee. 3. Which fresh or revised measures would accelerate the resolution of criminal appeals? Would such measures detract from the fair and deliberative review essential to determine whether the decision of the trial court in a criminal case was arrived at fairly and accurately? There are several new and revised measures that have come up to speed the resolution of illegal appeals. One of these measures includes the proper reviewing of the judicial process. This enables in the determination of whether there was any form of injustice performed by the jurisdiction. Unfortunately, jurisdictions in developing countries face many challenges including corruption and ethnicity among others. This may hinder justice from prevailing for the victim involved. Jurisdictions should deal with cases regarding misconduct among the jurors. This should also address issues related to misuse of power by the jurors to harass the case victims. These measures speed up the resolution of criminal appeals. In addition, jurors who go against these measures and engage in wrong-doing should be charged as criminals, and their conflict of interest in listening to cases should be withheld by the judiciary until justice prevails (Scheb, 2011). 8. After studying briefs submitted by counsel and trial oral arguments in a proceeding open to the public, appellate judges retire to discuss privately and decide the merits of criminal appeals. Should these deliberations be open to the public? Explain? Most jurisdictions prefer working in closed chambers. Oral arguments can be attended by the public, however, when it comes to other pertinent and delicate matters, then the judges are granted the opportunity to conduct private discussions. In many countries, the Supreme Court has the ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal and state courts. It is clearly depicted that certain matters are not disclosed to the public. Examples of such incidences involve jury selection and discussion of merits of criminal appeals. Criminal appeals can be made if the judgments of the jurors are biased or there is some form of maliciousness suspected in the ruling. Discussion of such deliberations should not be made public since these merits discussed are personal ideas that jurors come up with in line with the justice system. In addition, after oral arguments the discussion procedure also involves preliminary votes, which are based on the majority of the jurors. Revealing of such vital information to the public can lead to other misunderstandings (Scheb, 2011). 10. Does the ability of a convicted defendant to secure DNA testing rise to an issue of due process of law? Should there be a statute of limitations on a defendant raising the issue? Does Congress have a role to play in providing a standardized process throughout the country? Should the process be governed by federal statute, or should state legislatures and courts be left free to develop their own procedures? The DNA sample can provide information related to paternity, health and other personal issues. Inmates view the DNA sampling procedure as an act of genetic discrimination. DNA samples reveal personal information and aid the judicial system in catching up with a number of unlawful individuals like sex offenders. Inmates subjected to the mandatory statutes which condition them to giving DNA samples on freedom grant, have attacked the Fourth Amendment statutes (Scheb, 2011). However, courts uphold these statutes. These courts should not come up with their own procedures, but, they should follow statutes of the federal law and state. In regard to this matter, there ought to be a statute to standardize such short-comings to the defendant. Basically, getting information from someone is a heinous act according to most jurisdictions. The court’s arguments in supporting these statutes are legitimate and convincing, but the court seems to overlook the dangers linked to this type of testing and the invasion of personal privacy. Even though, these tests help tremendously in finding justice, they should be carried out legally according to the tort law in the respective country. Reference Scheb, J. (2011). Criminal law and procedure. Tennessee: Cengage Press. Read More