POLS 207 Notes
1. What makes the courts different from the legislative and executive branches?:
- Judicial procedures are more formal:
- Special requirements for obtaining access:
- Courts are reactive rather than proactive:
- Range of decision making:
(State legislature wants laws to be applied to everybody; broad; narrow and specific for the
courts however)
- Appearance of objectivity: trying not to look as partisan or ideological as the other
branches; political considerations must not dictate the outcomes of their cases; this
helps them remain prestigious
*At the appellate court level and higher, there are implications that are put into place when making decisions. Courts are more often
constrained due to this.
_______-following precedent
_______-for lower courts, their decision is even further constrained
2. What is the structure of the State Court systems? Explain how they may be funneling
down to the appellate courts, and how this leads eventually to the court of last resort.
- Level 1) Courts of limited jurisdiction
Generally hear case first
Deal w/ a narrow range of activities
Ex: small claims courts; civil dispute between two people (ex: tennant vs. land owner)
Ex: Juvenile court (limited only to minors)
Ex: traffic court (ex: speeding)
- Level 2) Major Trial Courts
Revolves around county or district lines
Handle cases that you hear about the most (murder, criminal, felonies w/ juries involved)
The proceedings are generally quite formal; [compared to traffic court, this is very formal]
Ex: Circuit court
Ex: District Court
Ex: Criminal court
- Level 3) Appellete Courts
Hear appeals from lower cases
Reviewing decisions that have already been made
Court hearings only reach this when a decision has been made; if someone doesn’t like
what was said, they may take this to the appellate courts.
(ex: 1 party may be convicted and they may want to appeal)
Ex: Superior Court
, Ex: Court of Appeals
- Level 4) Courts of Last Resort
Ex: Supreme Courts
Generally call the supreme court
5-9 justices
Have final say in state and local issues
(Ex: violations to my rights within the state constitution state laws, this is where i go. If it’s
a national constitution issue, then i can go to the US supreme court; this will only occur
with federal issues)
3. Define judicial federalism and explain its significance in the court system
The US has a dual system of courts
- Some cases will go to state/local courts
This is mostly where criminal cases will go
- Some cases though will go ONLY to federal courts (ex: mail fraud, counterfeiting, first
amendment issues)
- Some cases can go before either state or federal courts (ex: murder; crimes done on
federal property though are federal crimes; if done on a federal building, it can also
classify as a federal issue, despite murder being generally a state issue)
4. What is “venue shop”?
Where is the case the easiest to prove?
Where is the punishment more reasonable to happen?
Where is my best case of winning? State or federal?
This is what makes one decide where to file a case.
5. What are the 5 ways of selecting judges?
- Partisan elections: republican vs democratic
Primary→___→
More common in southern states
- Non-partisan elections: no party label there
- Legislative selection: Not used often, but this is where people may invest more time
and energy into electing judges.
FORMER state legislatures may have greater influence, and so if the legislatures know
you as a former legislature, you can get a leg up.
- Appointment by the governor: FEW states rely on the governor to do this; but it isn’t
nonexistent.
Interim appointments are where this is important (if a judge dies, retires early, etc); this is
where the governor can appoint judges.
, If i resign before my term, then who picks next judge? The governor….who was from my
party. I can even recommend the governor to appoint someone. → gives incumbents
and parties in general the advantage!!!! Creates a higher level of guarantee.
- Missouri or merit plans:
1. Started off with a judicial nominating commission made up of current lawyers and
nominators; they are NOMINATING people who CAN be recommended or
proposed.
Nominates a LIST of candidates; (these lawyers know better!). → leads to a quality list of
candidates.
2. The governor then picks off of this list; he isn’t picking his favorites though.
3. Retention election after 1-2 years; introduces popular control into this. Asks
voters to get rid of them (governor goes back and then picks someone else), or
they can choose to keep them.
Benefits: Well qualified candidates being selected on merit vs. politics.
Drawbacks: But, you aren’t removing politics entirely from this process.
Also, are these “retention elections?” →these are considered as not-needed elections; not
useful since they are rare
6. What is commonly expected among both partisan and non-partisan elections?
Expect judicial candidates to have non-specific policies.
They may more often talk about their qualifications, their general demeanor of the political
system, etc.
Specifics are not really discussed.
****Partisan level may give more idea about the candidate than normal campaigning, which
creates a greater level of expectation for partisan voting than non-partisan.****
However, due to a lower knowledge of voters for selecting who is going to become a judge,
there are challenges to the election model…
7. Why is money a challenge for judicial candidates?
The groups that donated money are those who desire
This hurts the appearance of objectivity. It may cause people to appear like they have more
influence because of money, which makes the candidate even look bad, along with those that
are donating overall.
8. What is the significance of trial courts and
Trial courts and supreme courts are based off of decision making
9. What is plea bargaining
Handles 90% of cases that are vial
About 1-2% or less will go to jury trials that we see on TV.
The main way criminal cases are determined is via plea bargaining.
, Negotiation between the prosecutor and the defendant, who either pleads guilty for a lesser
charge or for a reduced sentence.
The judge makes sure they are truly pleading guilty.
10.Why is plea bargaining a controversial issue?
- Getting a reduced sentence for what they should have gotten
- A lot of defendants may seemingly plead guilty for something they didn’t do (this may be
out of fear of being prosecuted)
- Some people think this is bad because some people may be let out too easy, and others
may be pleading towards something they didn’t do.
11.If it is so controversial, why do we have plea bargaining?
- It saves a lot of TIME.
- Our court system could not handle the many many cases of criminal issues, so they had
to make these available
- Plea bargaining is important to the system because 1) it would be overly burdensome if
all cases went to a jury trial; 2) may avoid losing a case that seems somewhat weak
12.Describe the trial by jury process, which differs from the plea bargaining process.
- Fewer than one percent of all criminal cases are resolved by jury trial
- Jury responsibilities: evaluating evidence and determining guilt; NOT the judge
- The judge’s responsibilities: rules and procedures must be followed, and the evidence
being brought in must be valid. Was it done in a legal way? Also, the judge does not
allow bias, etc. TO PREVENT REVERSABLE ERROR=in those procedures, if a mistake
is made, the appeals court reverses the decision; the judge makes it to where there
cannotttt be a verdict of the jury thrown out!!! THE CASE CANNOT BE DECIDED
DIFFERENTLY BY HIGHER COURTS.
13.List and describe the 4 tiers of courts in Texas.
1) Limited Jurisdiction Courts: bottom of trial courts
(ex: justice of peace courts)
2) District Courts: for original jurisdiction for felony crimes and civil law suits)
(ex: murder, armed robbery)
447 district courts—-overall, there’s a LOT of district courts!
Almost 2 courts for every county on average.
3) Appellate courts: 1 party in a civil suit, doesn’t like outcome, appeals, etc.
Texas has a total of 15!!!!
When we hit level 3, we have 15 appellate courts. 447 gets funneled down to 15.
Handles specific disputes handling constitutionality of state law and of state issues.
*They are not relooking at all evidence; they are looking for REVERSABLE ERRORS the
judge is trying to avoid; looking at procedures. (“Was jury instructions handled
correctly?”)
1. What makes the courts different from the legislative and executive branches?:
- Judicial procedures are more formal:
- Special requirements for obtaining access:
- Courts are reactive rather than proactive:
- Range of decision making:
(State legislature wants laws to be applied to everybody; broad; narrow and specific for the
courts however)
- Appearance of objectivity: trying not to look as partisan or ideological as the other
branches; political considerations must not dictate the outcomes of their cases; this
helps them remain prestigious
*At the appellate court level and higher, there are implications that are put into place when making decisions. Courts are more often
constrained due to this.
_______-following precedent
_______-for lower courts, their decision is even further constrained
2. What is the structure of the State Court systems? Explain how they may be funneling
down to the appellate courts, and how this leads eventually to the court of last resort.
- Level 1) Courts of limited jurisdiction
Generally hear case first
Deal w/ a narrow range of activities
Ex: small claims courts; civil dispute between two people (ex: tennant vs. land owner)
Ex: Juvenile court (limited only to minors)
Ex: traffic court (ex: speeding)
- Level 2) Major Trial Courts
Revolves around county or district lines
Handle cases that you hear about the most (murder, criminal, felonies w/ juries involved)
The proceedings are generally quite formal; [compared to traffic court, this is very formal]
Ex: Circuit court
Ex: District Court
Ex: Criminal court
- Level 3) Appellete Courts
Hear appeals from lower cases
Reviewing decisions that have already been made
Court hearings only reach this when a decision has been made; if someone doesn’t like
what was said, they may take this to the appellate courts.
(ex: 1 party may be convicted and they may want to appeal)
Ex: Superior Court
, Ex: Court of Appeals
- Level 4) Courts of Last Resort
Ex: Supreme Courts
Generally call the supreme court
5-9 justices
Have final say in state and local issues
(Ex: violations to my rights within the state constitution state laws, this is where i go. If it’s
a national constitution issue, then i can go to the US supreme court; this will only occur
with federal issues)
3. Define judicial federalism and explain its significance in the court system
The US has a dual system of courts
- Some cases will go to state/local courts
This is mostly where criminal cases will go
- Some cases though will go ONLY to federal courts (ex: mail fraud, counterfeiting, first
amendment issues)
- Some cases can go before either state or federal courts (ex: murder; crimes done on
federal property though are federal crimes; if done on a federal building, it can also
classify as a federal issue, despite murder being generally a state issue)
4. What is “venue shop”?
Where is the case the easiest to prove?
Where is the punishment more reasonable to happen?
Where is my best case of winning? State or federal?
This is what makes one decide where to file a case.
5. What are the 5 ways of selecting judges?
- Partisan elections: republican vs democratic
Primary→___→
More common in southern states
- Non-partisan elections: no party label there
- Legislative selection: Not used often, but this is where people may invest more time
and energy into electing judges.
FORMER state legislatures may have greater influence, and so if the legislatures know
you as a former legislature, you can get a leg up.
- Appointment by the governor: FEW states rely on the governor to do this; but it isn’t
nonexistent.
Interim appointments are where this is important (if a judge dies, retires early, etc); this is
where the governor can appoint judges.
, If i resign before my term, then who picks next judge? The governor….who was from my
party. I can even recommend the governor to appoint someone. → gives incumbents
and parties in general the advantage!!!! Creates a higher level of guarantee.
- Missouri or merit plans:
1. Started off with a judicial nominating commission made up of current lawyers and
nominators; they are NOMINATING people who CAN be recommended or
proposed.
Nominates a LIST of candidates; (these lawyers know better!). → leads to a quality list of
candidates.
2. The governor then picks off of this list; he isn’t picking his favorites though.
3. Retention election after 1-2 years; introduces popular control into this. Asks
voters to get rid of them (governor goes back and then picks someone else), or
they can choose to keep them.
Benefits: Well qualified candidates being selected on merit vs. politics.
Drawbacks: But, you aren’t removing politics entirely from this process.
Also, are these “retention elections?” →these are considered as not-needed elections; not
useful since they are rare
6. What is commonly expected among both partisan and non-partisan elections?
Expect judicial candidates to have non-specific policies.
They may more often talk about their qualifications, their general demeanor of the political
system, etc.
Specifics are not really discussed.
****Partisan level may give more idea about the candidate than normal campaigning, which
creates a greater level of expectation for partisan voting than non-partisan.****
However, due to a lower knowledge of voters for selecting who is going to become a judge,
there are challenges to the election model…
7. Why is money a challenge for judicial candidates?
The groups that donated money are those who desire
This hurts the appearance of objectivity. It may cause people to appear like they have more
influence because of money, which makes the candidate even look bad, along with those that
are donating overall.
8. What is the significance of trial courts and
Trial courts and supreme courts are based off of decision making
9. What is plea bargaining
Handles 90% of cases that are vial
About 1-2% or less will go to jury trials that we see on TV.
The main way criminal cases are determined is via plea bargaining.
, Negotiation between the prosecutor and the defendant, who either pleads guilty for a lesser
charge or for a reduced sentence.
The judge makes sure they are truly pleading guilty.
10.Why is plea bargaining a controversial issue?
- Getting a reduced sentence for what they should have gotten
- A lot of defendants may seemingly plead guilty for something they didn’t do (this may be
out of fear of being prosecuted)
- Some people think this is bad because some people may be let out too easy, and others
may be pleading towards something they didn’t do.
11.If it is so controversial, why do we have plea bargaining?
- It saves a lot of TIME.
- Our court system could not handle the many many cases of criminal issues, so they had
to make these available
- Plea bargaining is important to the system because 1) it would be overly burdensome if
all cases went to a jury trial; 2) may avoid losing a case that seems somewhat weak
12.Describe the trial by jury process, which differs from the plea bargaining process.
- Fewer than one percent of all criminal cases are resolved by jury trial
- Jury responsibilities: evaluating evidence and determining guilt; NOT the judge
- The judge’s responsibilities: rules and procedures must be followed, and the evidence
being brought in must be valid. Was it done in a legal way? Also, the judge does not
allow bias, etc. TO PREVENT REVERSABLE ERROR=in those procedures, if a mistake
is made, the appeals court reverses the decision; the judge makes it to where there
cannotttt be a verdict of the jury thrown out!!! THE CASE CANNOT BE DECIDED
DIFFERENTLY BY HIGHER COURTS.
13.List and describe the 4 tiers of courts in Texas.
1) Limited Jurisdiction Courts: bottom of trial courts
(ex: justice of peace courts)
2) District Courts: for original jurisdiction for felony crimes and civil law suits)
(ex: murder, armed robbery)
447 district courts—-overall, there’s a LOT of district courts!
Almost 2 courts for every county on average.
3) Appellate courts: 1 party in a civil suit, doesn’t like outcome, appeals, etc.
Texas has a total of 15!!!!
When we hit level 3, we have 15 appellate courts. 447 gets funneled down to 15.
Handles specific disputes handling constitutionality of state law and of state issues.
*They are not relooking at all evidence; they are looking for REVERSABLE ERRORS the
judge is trying to avoid; looking at procedures. (“Was jury instructions handled
correctly?”)
