The Problem of the Corrections in Prisons - Term Paper Example

Corrections and Prisons The law in every country has a purpose to protect all the citizens despite their social status and crime committed. It is in these regards that legal systems such as courts get established to protect both the offenders and the offended. The main function of courts is to analyze evidences presented and to ascertain crimes committed while awarding the correct sentence. The sentence, however, is given after proving a person guilty as charged. The sentencing varies with the legal stipulations and Acts of law in the constitution of every country. In addition, the sentencing is also dependent on the intensity of crime committed as well as the cooperation of the accused not forgetting the background. It is on this basis that the USA established a legal system, which included the police, and the federal court system. The federal court system of the US falls in the judiciary system under the USA constitution. The US federal court system gets segmented into the highest court composed of the Supreme Court, which acts as a last resort in the process of judgment. It also has the appellate (appeal) courts that are in charge of appeals for the district of Colombia, appeals for veterans, appeals for the armed forces, appeals for the federal circuit, as well as the foreign intelligence court of review. Below the appellate court, is the district court including the 94 federal district courts (Neubauer & Fradella, 2010). In Article III of the USA law, the United States congress is the body mandated, with constitutional power to establish courts. It also the body permitted to formulate regulations governing the courts. In addition, they can create limitations as well as eliminate the federal judiciary excluding the Supreme Court. The district court remains the general trial courts in the US with jurisdiction to handle any case according to the specification in the constitution. They also have the jurisdiction to hear appeal diverted by the administrative judges the higher courts. This must come with authority from the above courts according to article three of the United States constitution on legal systems. The supreme courts, on the other hand, operates under a mandatory system of review which means the court only listens to appeals from the district courts (Mauk & Oakland, 2005). When a person is, therefore, not satisfied with the decisions from the district courts, he is granted by law to lodge complains in the Supreme Court in the form of appeals. The Supreme Court, therefore, is a court that handles complicated cases and appeals from the lower courts. They, in addition, deal with selected and intricate cases, which are too sensitive to be handled by the lower district court, which is discretionary review. The lower court including the district courts, on the other hand, deals with any case ranging from crime to family disputes (Vile, 2007). Not forgetting is the fact that federal courts are also charged with the responsibility of listening to lawsuits and cases, which concerns the state. These include a Supreme Court under the original jurisdiction granted, by writs of certiorari to handle the cases existing between the federal governments. The court system in America is almost the same for all courts. It court procedure start with a pretrial session for most cases. This is after all the evidence for the accused is availed. The pretrial stage is where the judges agree in the pretrial conferences. It is the point where the judges decide which issues are in dispute and the ones, not in dispute; the dispute issues include witnesses and evidence inform of police statements and crime scene bulletins (Vile, 2007). It is also in the pretrial sessions where sides, the defense and the defendant reveal their witnesses. It is a session where an agreement on the proceeding’s general layout is discussed and a conclusion reached. However, agreeing during the pretrial stage does not influence the decision to be given during main session of the court. This is because as much as scrutiny of documents occurs during the pretrial stage adequate preparation by the lawyers contribute a win (Neubauer & Fradella, 2010). Moreover, the pretrial stage involves training of witnesses on the questions to expect from the opponent’s side. For instance, witnesses are normally induced on the rule of being sure when answering questions while not showing signs of weakness. It is also in the session where lawyers get cautioned against asking impossible questions. Lawyers also rehearse questions likely to arise during the court session, preparing and grilling the witnesses emotionally. This gets done to prevent both the witnesses and lawyers from straying away from the case. Consequently, pretrial is where smart lawyers conduct serious research and investigation. This includes visiting crime scenes and exploring physical evidence. It is also a session which prove the legality of method of obtain evidenced and as well as the legality of the evidences. For instance under the American law, the fourth amendment prevents unreasonable seizures or searches as such evidence obtained through such means are not regarded as legal and are, therefore, rejected. This is in the case where the court rules the evidence to be illegal, but if the court rules the evidence to be legal, the trial is the started (Neubauer & Fradella, 2010). However, before trial a jury must be selected with both parties with the process beginning with selection of Jurors. This gets done in reference to the rules set out by the federal court as well as the congress. In order to complete, the process of choosing the jurors each party proposes prospective jurors with the judge being the one to decide which juror to fit for the case. This is a process called Voir Dire and the lawyers vest the authority of rejecting jurors without justification, which they think might be impartial or might give misleading judgments. With a complete selection of the jurors, the pretrial process is complete, and the trial stage is ready. The trial stage starts with opening statements from the both parties justifying both their cases. It is also in the opening statements where the lawyers present issues to the jury and the judge. In addition, the opening statements describe the evidence as well as persuade the jury to decide the case in their favor. After setting the court in motion, the plaintiff’s lawyer, who might be a government’s attorney, questions his witnesses (direct examination). The defendant lawyer also questions the plaintiff’s witness, a process known as cross-examination. This is a procedure like a war as each lawyer struggles to obtain information from both party’s witness (Mauk & Oakland, 2005). In the process of cross examination, documents including driving license, firearms, bank records and other objects might be produced to make the probe more positive. After presenting evidence and cross examining the witnesses the court session, is finished with a closing statement from both parties. Just like the opening statement, they do not form part of the evidence but a summary of why the decision by the jury should be on their favor. When the closing statement is complete, the judge gives a direction of how the decision should be made and the laws that should be applied when arriving at the verdict (Vile, 2007). The jury then retires to a closed jury room where they discuss the evidence and the testimonies from the witnesses. In most cases, the verdict from the jury must be unanimous unless there is any agreement by both parties to accept a non-unanimous verdict. This is a session where citizens often try to make the jury as comfortable as possible. However, much it is encouraged that it smoothen operations of the judicial system, it should not be done to attract favor in winning the case. The jury then forwards their decision to the judge who then reads the decision before the whole court. In case, there is no jury the judge makes the decision alone or sets a date for coming up with the sentence. In order to come up with the sentencing from the decision the judge consults a pre-sentence report prepared by courts probation sector (Mauk & Oakland, 2005). This is a report, which gives criminal records, family and employment status of the defendant as well as the law, which guides such sentences. A defendant found guilty in the process of giving the sentence is allowed under the USA law, to appeal on the ground of improper evidence or part of law, which was not applied during the trial. In the fifth amendment of the American constitution, no person shall, “be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb” for the same offense. However, if a defendant pleads guilty, there can never be an appeal. When one decides to appeal on an appellate court, a three-judge bench hears the case while reviewing all the records from the previous trial. The court then identifying the reason before the appellate comes up, with a final decision. The reason can be oral or formal depending on the sensitivity of the case after which the judges with a majority vote carries the day. At this point, the case is complete and the final decision whether guilty or not finalized (Neubauer & Fradella, 2010). For an officer, to properly conduct, a trial for a defendant, some of the legal requirements that must be satisfied for a legal system include. Defendant’s documents, including identity card, family information, passports and past information of the defendant. Witnesses in the crime committed Tangible evidence including guns, gunpowder and any material used to commit the crime Video tapes or recording legally obtained In conclusion, the USA court legal system remains one of the perfect court systems in the world. It is a system that gives options to people including appeals hence ensure cases, are exhausted. In addition, it also rated as one of the courts free from the influence by people as it has various system of operation a factor that denies an individual from manipulation. References Mauk, D. & Oakland, J. (2005). American Civilization: An Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge, 2005 Neubauer, D. & Fradella, H. (2010). America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System. New York, NY: Cengage Learning, 2010 Vile, M. J. (2007). Politics in the USA. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, 2007 Read More