...The United States Court System Dona' De Kendricks CJA 224 March 20, 2011 Christopher Bragg Abstract The U.S. Constitution creates a dual federal court system in which the power is shared between the state and the federal governments. Each of these courts systems are composed of their own courts. State courts have the highest power in general. Within the courts there are trial and appellate courts. These two are considered to work together when there are issues within cases. When a case has any issues in the trial courts it will go to the appellate court for review. The United States court system help serve justice. United States Court System In 1789 Congress convened and emerged with the Judiciary Act of 1789, setting up a judicial system composed of a Supreme Court, Appellate Courts, and Trial Courts. The Constitution created three branches of government the executive, legislative, and the judicial court. The federal court of the United States derives its name and power from Article III of the Constitution. Article III and Section 1 establishes the Supreme Court and provides Congress the power to establish lower federal courts. Congress established the Appellate Courts consist of 12 regional court of appeals and one Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit; the Trial Courts consist of 94 Court Districts, the Bankruptcy Court, the Court of International Trade, and the Court of Federal Claims. Individuals...
Words: 1421 - Pages: 6
...1. CheckPoint: Trial and Appellate Courts • Write a 200- to 300-word response answering Discussion Question 1 on p. 488 in The Courts in Our Criminal Justice System. How are appellate courts different from trial courts? How do the functions, roles, and outcomes of appellate courts set them apart from trial courts? Appellate courts differ from trial courts in various ways. Trial courts find the facts of a case and decide how the law applies in the particular case—this is done on both state and federal levels. Evidence and witnesses are presented and a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence. Appellate courts examine claims where the law was incorrectly applied or where legal procedures were not followed properly. No new evidence is presented but the judge reviews the materials from the trial and decide if the lower court was correct in their judgment. The appeals process is aimed to ensure that a defendant received due process at prior stages of the criminal justice process and it pursues legal goals in the case. Appeals are an important part of the criminal justice system because they are a means to address legal issues under the basis of stare decisis; where precedent is respected in the law but legal societal and technological changes bring new issues to the courts. Legal questions often arise from such issues and become the subject of appeals. The appellate court then produces a holding that contributes to legal precedent on the issue. The court’s holding...
Words: 444 - Pages: 2
...COURT COMPARISON AND CONTRAST PAPER 1 Court Comparison and Contrast Paper COURT COMPARISON AND CONTRAST PAPER 2 Comparing State and Federal Court Systems There are many factors that involve the differences in state and federal courts. The three major factors that separate the two court systems are the structure, the selection of judges, and the types of cases that are presented in each of the two court levels. There are many reasons that there are two different court levels. This is so that we have checks and balance between the federal courts and the state courts. The structure of the Federal courts is based off Article III of the constitution of the United States. This article gave the federal system the power to create the Supreme Court as well as all the lower federal courts. The federal court system is broken down into six different types of courts which starting from the highest are the Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals, United States District Courts, as well as the special federal courts which are the United States Bankruptcy Courts and the United States Courts of Special Jurisdiction. Within each of these courts they each handle specific cases that are presented to them. The State Court System is broken down into four different levels of courts. First are the trial courts...
Words: 1458 - Pages: 6
...The difference between trial courts and appellate courts are complex, but are two important entities necessary within the justice system. Trial courts grant the initial pass for a civil or criminal proceeding to have a voice in court. Appellate courts have authority to reassess findings decided on at trial court level. There are four essential parts amidst trial and appellate courts: purpose, evidence, juries, and judges (Ehow.com, 2012). Purpose Trial court focuses on finding the facts in determining the best decision for the case brought forth. The focus for appellate court is quite different since the facts in the proceeding came from trial court level. Appellate court consists of two considerably uncommon aspects. One aspect determines if either group was granted an unbiased hearing. The other aspect establishes if law was properly used in the case and to determine if for any reason to alter the law (Ehow.com, 2012). Evidence In trial court, the two groups show proof in convincing juries or judges that each statement given is convincing enough to take into consideration as the truth. Forms of evidence offered may come as an eye witness as well as an illustration. Additionally, since the establishment of the facts was decided in trial court, no other evidence may enter in the appellate court level. As an alternative, disputing lawyers in appellate court formulate a strategy on the basis of laws and procedure matters (Ehow.com, 2012). Juries ...
Words: 430 - Pages: 2
...State courts are courts of general jurisdiction; they hear the cases on the federal level. It is broken down between for layers; lower courts, major trial courts, intermediate appellate courts, and state high courts. Although they all work differently and independently, they all have the same goal, which is serving justice. Lower courts, also known as trial courts of limited jurisdiction, are courts of lesser rank; for example municipal or justice court below a superior or county court, a superior or county court below an appeals court, or a federal District Court of Appeals below the U. S. Supreme Court. Lower courts are “responsible for responsible for handling the early stages of felony criminal cases” (page 93). After an arrest, the judge...
Words: 537 - Pages: 3
...majority U.S. states including federal courts they are allowed an appeal per parties as a right. This pertaining to the party who is unpleased with the results of a verdict can bring an appeal to contest that ruling. However, appeals may be costly, and the appellate court must find an error on the part of the court below that justifies upsetting the verdict. Therefore, only a small proportion of trial court decisions result in appeals. Some appellate courts, particularly supreme courts, have the power of discretionary review, meaning that they can decide whether they will hear an appeal brought in a particular case. Appellate court judges, then, often review decisions made by trial court judges. (Meyer & Grant 2003) It is important to note that different judges may be involved at different decision points. In fact, judges from a variety of levels may be involved in the same case as it progresses through the justice system. Even in felony cases, a lower court justice might set bail or preside over the preliminary hearing. After the preliminary hearing, the case would be transferred to the felony level courts, where a different judge may hear pre-trial motions and preside over the trial. Then, if the case is appealed, appellate level judges would become involved. If the appeal involves a constitutional issue, a federal appellate judge or panel of federal appellate judges may hear the appeal. (Meyer & Grant 2003) In addition, appellate court judges in twenty-three states are...
Words: 498 - Pages: 2
...Court Comparison Contrast Paper CJA/224 December 12, 2010 Court Comparison Contrast Paper The United States Constitution is the law of the land and creates a federal system of government known as the judicial system. The power of the United States’ judicial system has two different court systems, the state courts, and the federal courts. Our current judicial system consists of the following courts, federal, and federal appellate courts, trial courts, state trial courts, and state appellate courts. Each state including individual cities and other municipalities establishes the state courts. The United States Constitution establishes federal courts. The Federal Courts only see cases that involve the Constitution or laws passed by Congress. Although the Constitution is the law from which both court systems base their decisions off, they have many differences. The main difference between the state and federal courts lies within the jurisdiction or the types of cases that each hears. Depending on the nature of the case will determine which court the case will go through. Aside from the types of cases heard by state and federal courts, the selections of judges along with the structure of these courts differ. The following paper discusses the similarities and differences between the two court systems that currently make up the United States judicial system. Most states have a multilevel court structure, including a trial court, an intermediate court of appeals, and...
Words: 1461 - Pages: 6
...Appellate courts do not hear testimony of witnesses or attempt to determine which of the witnesses who testified at trial should have been believed. Determining the credibility of the witnesses is the job of the trier of fact. Appellate courts review the trial record, motions, and evidentiary exhibits. True False A Demurrer would be the appropriate pre-trial motion to file if the complaint did not state a valid cause of action (valid claim) even if all the allegations contained in the complaint were true. True False Identify which, if any, of the underlying occur during the informal discovery phase of a lawsuit: Depositions Interrogatories The actual trial Both A & B None of the above One of the types of pleadings that Defendants file in response to the plaintiff’s complaint is called the answer (which is also referred to as the response). True False Identify which, if any, of the below circumstances can occur as a result of an appeal: The appellate court can reverse the trial court The appellate court can affirm the trial court The appellate court can remand the case to the trial court Any of the above Does it ever occur in a lawsuit that the defendant stipulates to the plaintiff’s factual allegations? Yes No The quantum of evidence required for a verdict in a civil case is identical to the quantum of evidence required for a conviction in a criminal case. True False The jury hears the evidence presented at trial and decides the facts that...
Words: 1809 - Pages: 8
...Court Comparison Contrast Paper CJA/224 Introduction to Criminal Court Systems Court Comparison Contrast Paper During the course of reading this paper you will be introduced to the difference between trial court and appellate court. For example in trial courts there is actually only one judge within the room, he basically decides what can and can’t be used as evidence within the courtroom. In appellate courts there are five groups of three judges who basically divide’s the cases between them. You will also be to understand the difference between federal and state courts, for instance federal courts simply tend to handle cases such as illegal weapons and drugs that tend to cross our state lines, and state courts basically handle cases that deal’s the juvenile and family cases. After reading this paper will not only be able to understand when and where an appeal begins and ends, but you should also be able to fully understand the functions that between trial and appellate courts. State Court Each state has its own system of justice that oversees court cases. The judicial system that they employ will oversee a majority of the criminal cases that are presented. There are many levels of trial courts with at least one appellate court that states will have. The majority of states will have courts of general jurisdiction, which will hear major offenses like felonies. Courts of limited jurisdiction which will hear minor offenses. Some states...
Words: 1230 - Pages: 5
...Subject: Typical State Court System (Prazen vs Shoop) A typical state court system is designed to hear and rule various legal disputes and consists of limited-jurisdiction trial court, general-jurisdiction trial court, intermediate appellate court, and a supreme court. Limited-jurisdiction trial court also referenced as inferior trial courts preside over small claims courts, municipal courts, and justice of the peace courts. General-jurisdiction trial court or courts of record require that all evidence and testimonies are recorded and saved for future review. Two divisions of court of records consist of criminal and civil courts and preside over major legal cases, such as felonies. Intermediate appellate courts, referred to as appellate courts or courts of appeal presides over cases that have been heard in courts of record and all or part of the trial records is submitted for review. The appellate court gives its decision based solely on the facts that support the evidence. The final and highest court layer is the state supreme court; in which cases must have been heard in appellate court and certain trial courts (Cheeseman, 2013). In most cases, a supreme court verdict is final. The case of Prazen vs Shoop was processed through the state court system. Joseph Prazen retired from the City of Peru’s electrical department as the superintendent at the bottom of 1998 (Illinois Court, 2014). Prazen was able to secure his pension of more than 32 years of service with...
Words: 693 - Pages: 3
...Answer: A case is first presented in a trial court before it is taken to an appellate court. Parties file their lawsuits or complaints with the intent to protect their property rights or redress a wrongdoing to the trial court. If, after a decision has been reached, one party is unhappy with the result, he has up to ten days to announce his intent to appeal. Within a trial court, the judge has the duty of observing and applying constitutional limitations and guarantees. In those trials which do not have a jury, the judge is also responsible for finding the facts. In an appellate court, the judge/justices have only the duty to review a case that has previously been brought to a trial court. In other words, an appellate judge has the responsibility...
Words: 294 - Pages: 2
...appeal is a “proceeding in which a case is brought before a higher court for a review of a lower court’s judgment”. This basically means a process which takes place because the defendant and their attorney feel that the verdict that was given was inaccurate which was due to something that may have happened during trial or the arrest. Appeals are done to make sure that the person has had a fair trial and none of their rights were violated. An appellate court as the text states can help an area decided on how to address certain issues. This is good because the appellate court judges can make a decision without having to worry about what society will think and if they will get reelected. An appellate court goes through cases and tries to understand what has taken place during the arrest and see if the law was upheld. An appeals process starts right after the trial, the defense must submit an appeal to the court. The person appealing should file all documents with the appellate court. The will then file briefs and the court will later hear each sides argument and decide/ once the decision is made the courts will announce their findings and why. An appellate court is based on the law not on any facts so a defense attorney cannot argue the facts presented during the case or that you were found guilty and you believe you are innocent. Your appeal should consist of the fairness for example if you had the right to a speedy trial or a defense attorney etc. Appeals factor in to the overall...
Words: 342 - Pages: 2
...1. Differentiate between reasonable suspicion and probable cause. What does each allow a police officer to do? Probable cause is having enough evidence to convince a reasonable person that an illegal act has been committed. While reasonable suspicion is a level of evidence that a police officer needs in order to justify detaining a person for a criminal activity. So probable cause is a higher level of proof that reasonable suspicion. If the police do not have reasonable suspicion they cannot detain or question anyone. If there is no probable cause the court is going to dismiss the case and throw all the evidence out. 2. At what point in the investigation/arrest process does an officer have to give Miranda Warnings in order to ensure the...
Words: 365 - Pages: 2
...functions of trial courts. The trial court's basic function is to resolve disputes by determining the facts and applying legal principles to decide who is right. The appellate court's task is to determine whether the law was applied correctly in the trial court. 2. What is the difference between a dissenting and a concurring opinion? So Majority opinion is called the "Opinion of the Court," this is the official verdict in the case that represents the vote of the majority of justices Dissenting opinion is an opinion that is written by a justice who disagrees with the majority Concurring opinion is an opinion that agrees with the decision but may disagree with the some of the reasoning behind the Court opinion, or may elaborate on a point made or introduce further relevant information 3. List the major differences between trial and appellate courts. Trial courts are the courts where cases start. In the trial court, both sides present evidence to show their version of what happened but in the appellate courts, there are no witnesses, and no evidence is presented. Also the second difference between the two courts is the judges. In trial courts, there is one judge in the courtroom. That judge decides what evidence can and cannot be used and often decides the outcome of the case. In Indiana, appeals are decided by more then one judge. The last major difference between the trial courts and the appellate courts is the role of...
Words: 354 - Pages: 2
...two major court systems in the United States are the federal and state court systems. They are each set up review different types of lawsuits (Cheeseman, 2013). This memo will review the levels of the state court system as well as the various methods of alternative dispute resolution. The case of AMF Incorporated v. Brunswick Corp will be reviewed in the discussion of the state court systems. The companies signed an arbitration agreement but Brunswick advertised a new product which AMF disputed and requested arbitration. State Court Systems The majority of state courts include limited-jurisdiction trial courts, general-jurisdiction trial courts, intermediate appellate courts, and a supreme court (Cheeseman, 2013). Limited-Jurisdiction Trial Courts State limited-jurisdiction trial courts or inferior courts are in use to hear specific types of litigation such as traffic, family law and misdemeanor criminal cases. The decision of these courts can be appealed to a general-jurisdiction court or an appellate court. In the case of AMF v. Brunswick this process did not occur. General-Jurisdiction Trial Courts General-jurisdiction trial courts hear cases beyond the jurisdiction of limited trial courts. Judgments from these courts can be appealed to an intermediate appellate court or their state's supreme court. In the case of AMF v. Brunswick the case was heard by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Intermediate Appellate Courts In many...
Words: 713 - Pages: 3
