The U.S. Federal Court system I have chosen the United States Federal Court System as my topic of research. I believe the U.S Federal Court System is paramount to our criminal justice system. Today the Federal Court System is a complex structure of courts and actors working together in an imperfect process to deliver justice. Throughout the years there’s been controversy and debate between the rights of state and federal courts. However, as the dual process evolved they became dependent on each other. Without one or the other, the system will not function properly. The Federal Courts have been a controversial issue since the 18th century. The two landmark decisions that are well known are the Article III of the U.S Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789. Weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation in the past was thought to be the absence of a national supreme court to enforce federal law and resolve conflicts and issues between different states. The major issue during the Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 was that there be a separate court system for federal and state. This divided the people into two groups, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were advocates of state’s rights and feared a strong national government that would result in the weakening of individual liberties. The Federalists on the other hand distrusted the states and favored a strong national government. This conflict between the two groups was later resolved at the constitutional convention which designed Article III of the U.S. Constitution. This then provided an outline of a federal judiciary. (Americas Courts and the Criminal Justice System, 2009) “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” Since then, there were many alterations and ratifications made, but ultimately in 1988 Congress eliminated many of the mandatory appeals to the high court and provided us with the structure that we use today. In the United States we use a dual court system, which means that we have one national courts system plus separate court systems in each 50 states and the District of Columbia. The state and federal court systems share some judicial powers, but there are some examples where one crime is punishable under federal law and another crime may be punishable under the state law or vice versa. This to some may seem conflicting, which in some cases can be, but for the most part this allows the federal government to focus on specific crimes that they feel are of higher punishing than those “minor” crimes that can be handled by the states. The separate court systems does add discretion when dealing with crimes at the separate levels and this is why the framers of the constitution created two parts that would work side by side in the criminal justice system so that no offender would face the chances of being punished for the same crime twice which would be called double jeopardy. (America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice Sytem,2009) “The different types of cases a court may here are separated by the power of jurisdiction, this means that the court may decide which case will be heard or disputed. Jurisdiction can be divided into different geographical locations and venues, meaning that someone who has committed a crime in Texas by law cannot be punished for this crime in California or any other state. Venue refers to the particular location or area in which a court has geographic jurisdiction over. There are also subdivisions that can divide these venues into smaller areas, determined by city or county boundaries”. Since you cannot legally be punished in another state for a crime committed somewhere else, the state does have the option to extradite that criminal and surrender their rights of a criminal accused and send them to the state that they were originally charged. This can also occur outside of the country, for example if someone commits murder in the United States then flees to Mexico, the U.S. will request that the jurisdiction return this offender back to the U.S. and not have them punished outside of the country. Within jurisdiction there is also personal jurisdiction and hierarchical jurisdiction. Personal jurisdiction refers to the courts power over an individual person or corporation. An example would be if a person accused of fraudulent crimes or crime committed through the internet, meaning that they committed the crime but were not physically present when the crime was committed. Hierarchical jurisdiction refers to difference in the courts functions and all the responsibilities. This is divided into two types, original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. Original means that a court has the authority to try a case and decide the results. Appellate jurisdiction means that courts had to power to review cases that have already been decided by other courts, but they believe there is a reason to re try it. Appellate courts often have limited original jurisdiction and The U.S. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over all offenses between the states. The current structure of federal courts is within four separate types of courts: The Magistrate, district, appellate, and the Supreme Court. Also included are a few different specialized courts, these may be your family courts, juvenile courts or courts they handle minor offenses. The lowest level of federal courts is the district courts. This is where cases are heard for the first time and trials are held. They hear every type of federal cases, whether it be civil or criminal offenses. There are currently 94 districts located within the 50 states plus the District of Columbia and four territorial districts in Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Within the district courts there are 678 judges, who are nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. These jobs are secured for lifetime and aren’t replaced unless problem arises. Within these courts are people from the public who are chosen to assist in jury duty. These people can be selected through voter registration once you turn 18. (Americas Courts and the Criminal Justice System, 2009) “There are two special trial courts that have nationwide jurisdiction over certain types of cases. The Court of International Trade addresses cases involving international trade and customs issues. The United States Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over most claims for money damages against the United States, disputes over federal contracts, and unlawful “takings” of private property”. The district courts are organized into the ninety-four judicial districts and separated into twelve regional circuits, each of which has their own United States Courts of Appeals. The court of appeals hears appeals from the district courts located within its circuit, and appeals from the federal administrative agencies. When something claims that they think a law has been broken or someone’s rights were mishandled they will appeal the case and this could end up with the case being taken to the Supreme Court. So in the end the Appellate court isn’t to decide if the offender is innocent or guilty, but it is to decide if the case was not handled in the right manner according to the law and if any rights were infringed. If the appeal is processed on and the court decides it is worthy of moving on to the next step then if will be taken to the Supreme Court, which is the “Last Resort Court” meaning the final decision. The Supreme Court consists of nine judges and only hears a limited number of cases per year. During specific times of the year they administration associated with and works with the courts decide what and which cases will be heard by the Supreme Court. They only meet on certain months and during this time a little over a hundred cases will be heard. It can take up to five months to hear these cases and since they have a limited amount of time they administration tries to make sure to choose cases that are worthy of their time. Typically chosen cases involve important questions about the Constitution of federal law violations. Many decisions of the Supreme Court are remarkable and in some case’s a mark in history that may or may not have made drastic changes in laws that we currently utilize today. Some of the greatest alterations that have occurred are through some very significant cases that have made their way to the Supreme Court. Within the court system are important actor’s that play special roles in making sure that the courts work properly and ensure that cases are dealt with appropriately. These different actors all participate in what is called the courtroom work group. The judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys along with other administrators are all a part of this group. Each having their own job within the court and working with one another to get the job done. Some actors of the court are behind the scenes but play important roles in the routine activities of court, they make work for the judge, or the attorneys. The most influential actor of the court and center of all actions is the prosecutor. Others specialize in specific areas of criminal justice and the prosecutor is in charge of working with all other actors. Their office decide which cases to prosecute, which cases to plea bargain, and which cases to try. They are also involved in setting bail and choosing sentences. Prosecutors are typically lawyers who are recognized by the courts of which they are choosing to represent. The main action of the prosecutor is to prove the guilt of the defendant. They use evidence, testimonies, and reports to justify their reasoning for their chosen sentences.
On the other end of the court is the defense attorney. These court actors are in charge of defending their client. Most defendants are unable to afford attorneys so they are provided with one who is paid for by the government. These indigents can be appointed attorneys in different ways different ways. One way is through court assigned counsel; this involves the court providing an attorney from a list of private attorneys in their jurisdiction or attorneys who volunteer. Some say that this method may provide counsel that is least qualified, but seems to be a common method of choosing.
The second method is through contract systems, which means the job will go to the attorney who bids the most and wins the case. The primary advantage of the contract system is that it limits the cost the government must pay for the services. But a disadvantage of the contract system is that it forms the standards of emphasizing costs over quality. Choosing the lowest bidder usually ends in the indigent being provided with the attorney who will willing to work for the least amount of money, which may not prove to be valuable.

The newest addition to methods of providing a defense attorney for indigents’ is a public defender. These are profit or nonprofit organizations with staff that may be full or part time. There are many advantages to this way of providing attorneys, one is that it may provide more experienced and highly skilled counsel since public defenders concentrate on criminal cases and are able to keep up with the many changes and keep their skills up to date. Another advantage is that they will be able to attend to the defense most of the time during the court which gives the defendant a better chance to have a good team during the entire court process. This will also help secure confidence in the defendant throughout the entire process of the case.

The second most important leader in the courtroom workgroup would be the judge. The courtroom is physically centered on this one person and he is considered the leader of the court. They are in charge of multiple positions in the courtroom. Making sure that everyone cooperates and works together during trial is a key role the judge plays, he will be the center for all discussion and decide in the end the final decisions. He or she will decide what cases will move onto trial and control the way the trial flows. The judge will also have authority or his or her court, which in all cases those who are within the courtroom are always aware of the judge and their wants. In criminal law when crimes have been committed the judge will be the one who hands out the guilty sentence. In civil law when money has been declared to be owed to another party the judge will also decide how much and the amount of time that the guilty party will have before they must fully have paid this restitution.
Though judge must be aware of the law and rules to be followed they are not always the best at managerial skills. Outside of the court they have administrators who are in charge of managing the courts and making sure that the judge only has to worry about his specified duty of running court and they will handle the papers and reports behind the scenes. All these actors are very important in all stages of the court system and without one the other would possibly fail at their own job. They work together to achieve the ultimate goal of fair trials and accurate results. The environment can differ from one court to another, but overall the system runs similar in each jurisdiction.
The last actor of the courtroom is significant because without this person their would be no reason for creating this system. The defendant or guilty party are the individuals who are being tried against for an offense that may or may not be guilty depending on the sentence. The court works around these individuals to create an environment or fair and equal chance for them during trial. No matter what level of court the defendant may be involved at, it always have rules and regulations that will maintain a legally fair route to ensure the defendants rights are always in mind. Through the Due Process the defendant is given specific rights protected by the Constitutions that cannot be violated throughout all processes of court. Within this clause there are right given to the defendant that will be abided by the courts and legal system from the time of his or hers initial appearance. Violation of these rights could lead to infringing of rights and reasoning for appeal. It is a key component to the criminal justice system.
In conclusion every court has its own ways of working through cases and the individuals who work within these courts all work together differently, but get the job done. Individuals fulfill these positions with different attributes offered for these specific roles, but must cooperate with one another to offer those who are on trial an equal chance at winning their case. The court system in the United States has proven to be a very important part of the criminal justice system and every year millions of offenders go in and out of trials trusting those who are working within the court to do their job to the best of their abilities. Without a well balanced and secure working court system the public will not maintain a confidence in the criminal justice system. With everyone in the system working together as a team they and the public can know that the decisions made are accurate and fair for all involved.

In my opinion the court system put in place is strong and provides accurate results for those who enter it. We utilize a system that coordinates with one another multiple times to ensure that all defendants receive fair trials and punishment. Though not all the actors who are working with one another always agree the court system allows people to keep balance and avoid mistakes when it comes to the taking or giving of someone’s life. When it comes to deciding who is innocent and who is guilty it is in the courts best interest to make these coordinating decisions and that’s why it’s the most important part of the criminal justice system.

Cites:
"Law US Court Systems Law & Legal Definition." Law US Court Systems Law & Legal Definition. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2012. <http://definitions.uslegal.com/l/law-us-court-systems/>.
"History." USCOURTSGOV RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2012. <http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/ProbationPretrialServices/History.aspx>.
"District Courts." USCOURTSGOV RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2012. <http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/UnderstandingtheFederalCourts/DistrictCourts.aspx>.
Neubauer, David W. America's Criminal Courts. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
"Judge." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2012. <http://bls.gov/k12/law04.htm>.