Criminal Justice Administration Exam 1 In-class activity

Criminal Justice Administration Exam 1 In-class activity what is the difference between Appellate Courts and District Courts? - 1) witnesses and exhibits: trial courts have all evidence and witnesses, but in the appellate courts, there are no witnesses and the only evidence presented is what was presented in the trial courts. 2) judges: in trial courts, there is one judge and that judge decides what evidence can be used and often decides the outcome of the case, but in appellate courts the decisions are reached by more than one judge. 3) juries: only in trial courts, not in appellate courts. -appellate courts don't re-hear a case and focus on the questions of whether or not the law was applied correctly. Plea Bargaining - A defendant's plea of guilty to a criminal charge with the reasonable expectation of receiving some consideration from the state for doing so, usually a reduction of the charge. The defendant's ultimate goal is a penalty lighter than the one formally warranted by the charged offense. Plea Bargaining Benefits - -prosecutor gains a quick, sure conviction -defendant achieves a shorter sentence -the defense attorney can move on to the next case. -Thus, the cooperation underlying the exchange promotes the goals of each participant. Plea Bargaining Criticisms - -might charge innocent people guilty -pressure on the accused -might be biased -arguably unconstitutional: takes away the defense's constitutional right to a trial by jury -more focused on negotiating a deal instead of winning a trial. Goals of the Criminal Justice System - Doing justice, controlling crime, preventing crime. crimes - Actions that violate laws defining which socially harmful behaviors will be subject to the government's power to impose punishments, including deprivation of liberty through imprisonment. mala in se - offenses that are wrong by their very nature. Ex: murder, rape mala prohibita - offenses prohibited by law but not necessarily wrong in themselves. Ex: drug use, gambling, prostitution 1st Goal of the CJ System: Doing Justice - -concerns fairness and equality in the treatment of people. -forms the basis for the rules, procedures, and institutions of the CJ system. -involves upholding the rights of individuals as well as punishing those who violate the law. goal involves 3 principles: 1) offenders will be held fully accountable for their actions 2) the rights of persons who have contact with the system will be protected 3) like offenses will be treated alike, and officials will take into account relevant differences among offenders and offenses. *Primary goal of the CJ system* 2nd Goal of the CJ System: Controlling Crime - -done by arresting, prosecuting, convicting, and punishing those who disobey the law. -major constraint: efforts to control crime must be carried out within the framework of law. 3rd Goal of the CJ System: Preventing Crime - -most important: deterrent effect of the actions of police, courts, and corrections. -these actions not only punish violators of the law, but provide examples that will likely keep others from committing wrongful acts. -technological advantages have helped with this. -citizens can be actively engaged in preventing crime as well by locking cars, installing alarms, etc. Evidence-based practices - Policies developed through guidance from research studies that demonstrate which approaches are most useful and cost-effective for advancing desired goals. -the development of approaches to addressing problems in CJ and advancing the goals of criminal justice by using research studies to guide decisions about what will work effectively. Convention - Laws are based on ________, or what has worked before. -Enact laws based on the beliefs of legislators about the nature of the problem and the response that will be effective in addressing it (Advancing the CJ System). Statutes - which are passed by a legislature and signed by an executive. Outlaws certain kinds of behaviors and often sets the penalty if it is violated. -Can be state or federal. Riggs V. Palmer - -Fransis Palmer executed a will leaving his estate to his two daughters, Mrs. Preston and Mrs. Riggs and his grandson, Elmer Palmer. Shortly after, Francis Palmer remarried, but drafted a prenupt. Elmer Palmer poisoned his grandfather to death in 1882, and was later convicted of murder. Mrs. Preston and Mrs. Riggs brought a claim to consider the provisions of the will which included Elmer as void. In response, the trial court dismissed the suit. -This case set the precedent for when straying from a statute would be permissible, even when the content is clear. To prevent an absurd result, it is ok for a court to interpret a statute in a way which establishes the statutory intent. -decision: no one should benefit from their own wrong. Rummel V. Estelle - -After being convicted of three felonies over a period of fifteen years, William James Rummel was given a life prison sentence as mandated by a Texas recidivist statute. Rummel's offenses involved approximately $230, and all of the offenses were nonviolent. Lower courts rejected Rummel's challenge to the sentence. -Did Rummel's life sentence under the Texas recidivist law constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment? -In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that the life sentence imposed by Texas law did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court held that Texas had a significant interest in dealing "in a harsher manner with those who by repeated criminal acts have shown that they are simply incapable of conforming to the norms of society." The Court also noted that Texas had "a relatively liberal policy of granting 'good time' credits to its prisoners," indicating that there was a possibility that Rummel would not be imprisoned for the rest of his life.