Unit 3 - Individual Project
(CJUS375-1802B-01)
CRINMIAL PROCEDURES
Janet Dulude
6/4/18
Typical state system The Arrest Process: Once a person is taken into custody, when they are suspected of a crime they will be questioned, they must be told that anything they say may be held against them in a court of law, and that they have the right to remain silent, the suspect will have his Miranda rights read to him. The Miranda Right are Fifth Amendment. to the U.S. Constitution focuses on the rights of the accused, due process of law, and related matters. It is very important in the context of criminal cases, including the right to not incriminate oneself and eminent domain rights. (https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/u-s-constitution-fifth-amendment.html)
…show more content…
The prosecutor may also introduce physical evidence, such as photographs, documents. Both attorneys have the same documents to know what each on is presenting at trial, there will be Cross- Examination on both sides of the parties to ask the witness questions. Closing Statements: The prosecution will make its closing argument, with the evidence as the prosecution sees it and describing why the jury should concentrate why there should be a guilty verdict. Then the defense will have their chance to explain why the defendant should be a "not guilty" verdict—or at least a guilty verdict on only a lesser charge. The prosecution can the last word, to reason with the jury that he as reiable evidence that they should come back with a guilty verdict. Jury: After closing statement the judge will directs the jury on those important legal documents to decided including results the jury will need to make instructions to arrive at a conclusion. The judge also describes important belief such as "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge will explain to the jury to consider the evidence presented at …show more content…
Ayala (Orange-Osceola State Attorney) in the case of Mar Keith Lloyd when she said she would not be seeking the death penalty in his case. And Gove. Scott executed the order to remove her from the case.
The Florida state attorney expected to prosecute the murder trial of Mar Keith Lloyd was removed from the case by Gov. Rick Scott on Thursday afternoon after refusing to seek the death penalty in the case.
(https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/16/us/orlando-shooting-markeith-loyd/index.html) There was a decision made last year (2017) by the U.S. Supreme Court to shut down the Florida’s death penalty statue because it violates the 6th Amendment because it would mean providing the judges and the juries the final verdict enforce capital punishment. The Governor of the State of Florida had a new statue that would demand commonly approve by the jury to impose the death
Gideon appearing before the Florida Court requested that the court appoint him an attorney. His trial judge Robert McCrary, Jr. denied this request. According to Florida State Law, the court could only appoint an attorney to an indigent defendant in capital cases....
Miranda rights are the entitlements every suspect has. An officer of the law is required to make these rights apparent to the suspect. These are the rights that you hear on every criminal investigation and policing show in the country, “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you, you have the right to consult an attorney, if you can no t afford an attorney one will be appointed for you.” After the suspect agrees that he or she understands his/her rights, the arrest and subsequent questioning and investigation may continue. These are liberties that were afforded to suspected criminals in the Miranda Vs Arizona. However, with every rule there also exceptions like: Maryland v. Shatzer, Florida v. Powell, and Berghuis v. Thompkins.
Defendant Freddie Lee Hall filed a motion to declare Florida Statute 921.137 (Florida Statute) as contrary to Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and, thus, unconstitutional. Hall, convicted in 1981 for the murder of Karol Hurst, was initially sentenced to death in September 1982. For three years, he fought his sentence, filing “a motion to vacate, a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an application for a stay of execution, all of which were denied” . In 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard his appeal and reversed part of the lower court’s ruling, a decision granted when the court found Hall “entitled to a hearing on the issues of his absence from the courtroom and whether he deliberately bypassed his ineffective assistance of counsel claim” .
After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning, they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include: 1. What is the difference between a. and a. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. 2.
On February 11, 1983 Robert Augustus Harper, Jr., filed Amicus Curiae on the case of Joyce Bernice Hawthorne v. State of Florida, 740 So.2d. 770. This was the third appearance of Hawthorne in the First District Court of Appeal of Florida for First degree murder, second degree murder and now manslaughter.
This article gives a thoroughly detailed explanation of both an opening statement and closing argument. In addition, it also demonstrates what the key difference between the two is. It states that during opening statements, both sides (defending and prosecuting) are prevented from stating the evidence of the case. During closing arguments, both sides are free to use and state the evidence. Although all the given information was helpful, I found this source to be the least helpful while writing my closing
Now that we have discussed the pretrial occurrences, we get into the trial portion of the court process. This is the portion of the process in which both the defense and the prosecution present their cases to the jury, the judge, and the rest of the courtroom. To select a jury, the bring in potential jurors and ask them questions,
The criminal trial process is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society to a great extent. For the law to be effective, the criminal trial process must reflect what is accepted by society to be a breach of moral and ethical conduct and the extent to which protections are granted to the victims, the offenders and the community. For these reasons, the criminal trial process is effectively able to achieve this in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury system.
his/her own witness as well as a presentation of defense by his/her attorney in order to conflict
we must first fully understand what rights citizens welcome Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. What are the "Miranda" rights?
Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.
This source explains the rights that should be told to a suspect that is arrested, the fifth and Sixth Amendments. It also explains how Miranda was identified as the criminal and what happened in the interrogation room. This source helped me understand the specific amendments that apply to Miranda Rights.
In the court, the prosecutor takes part in plea negotiations, leads discussions on resolutions and presents the case if there is sufficient evidence for a conviction.
Miranda is a ruling which says that the accused have the right to remain silent and prosecutors may not use statements made by them while in police custody, unless the police advice them of their rights. In other words, a police officer must inform a suspect of this fundamental right, under the Fifth Amendment, at the time of their arrest and or interrogation. Miranda protect ignorant suspects from incriminating themselves.
Based on what I have seen it is extremely important that a judge addresses the jurors to be impartial when considering guilt or innocence. A jury will be less likely to be biased if right before they enter the deliberation room the judge addresses them and tells them not to. It is important that the jury takes time to sieve through the facts of the case without attaching their own biases. Jurors should not be afraid to go against the majority if they interoperate facts differently, they should be ready to explain why. Doing so could help the other jurors see something they may not have initially.