Police and Law Enforcement PaperPolice and Law Enforcement paperUniversity of PhoenixThe criminal trial process begins either when an arrest is made, or when a warrant is issued. Within 48 hours of the arrest, an informal arraignment must be held. During the arraignment, defendants are informed of the charges brought against them. The defendant will be re-informed of the right to counsel. Bail will be set, at the discretion of the judge and depending on the charges. The next court appearance will be set. Defendants receiving no bail will be remanded into custody.
If the case is within state jurisdiction, a preliminary hearing will be held. The prosecutor must establish that a case is warranted. The judge would decide from the facts if the case should proceed. At federal level, rather than attending a preliminary hearing the defendant goes before the Grand Jury. The formal arraignment will take place within 30 days. A defendant may plea as âGuiltyâ, âNot Guiltyâ, âNolo Contenderâ, conditional plea, or âAlfordâ. The case will proceed with pre-trial hearings, and the trial itself.
An appeal may follow. An appeal is a request to a higher court to examine the decided case. If an appeal is accepted, the appellate court goes to trial. It reviews the original case to determine if the findings were accurate, followed the law, and were truthful. The court may decide to overturn a decision or it may send it back to trail court for re-trial. The appellate courts provide a safe-guard to defendants. The appellate system exists because errors occur. Several cases have been overturned over faulty evidence.
An appeal is not put in place to undermine the prosecution. Prosecuting is essential to society. It implants accountability to those who commit crimes. Convictions serve as deterrent, so others avoid doing the same act. The prosecutor represents the interests of the state. An offender has committed a wrong against the state.The prosecutor is also known as the state attorney, district attorney, or commonwealth attorney (Schmalleger, 2011).
The prosecutor is not the only member of the courtroom workgroup. This workgroup includes the judge, clerk, court reporter, and defense counsel.All these play an important role in the process. But, it is the judge who oversees all procedures. The prosecution and the defense counsel present the case and explain what happened. The judge then interprets and decides on matters of the law, and sentencing. This group works together to improve court performance. This includes the use of plea bargaining. This tool provides an alternative to the tedious process of a trial. Boland, Brady, Tyson, & Bassler (1983) show that about 90 percent of criminal cases are settled by plea bargain. This means
[Page 2]
2.2.1 Sentencing
It has been proven that sentencing is one of the most important aspects to the investigation of illegal activity. That is, if you commit a major felony, then you are likely to face at least some of the aggravating factors to receive a reduced sentence. (If you are charged with a minor crime and were charged with a violent felony then you may face at least some of the aggravating factors to be reduced.) However, a sentencing reduction is based on the court’s determination that the defendant committed the crime at a substantial and substantial risk that he/she will be convicted of those crimes. (For example, when an indictable offense was committed for which the sentencing rate has been about 9 percent, then a reduction of 20 to 25 percent would be necessary to convict a defendant with a violent felony with a sentence of 20 years and a minimum mandatory minimum prison sentence of 2, 5, or 10 years.) Sentencing systems are designed to work in tandem with a trial in case they cannot be improved by a trial, or if they would not work as intended to help the defendant achieve his/her desired outcome.
(See Federal Law § 5-17-17.) Because of the number of cases it facilitates (including more complex ones), such a reduction of sentencing rates is frequently described as a “prosecutorial imperative.”(The Federal Sentencing Regime Section 4 of the Sentencing Code (Regime § 54-1-202.04(1)) defines “prosecutorial imperative.” In cases where a case is determined to be beyond a fair degree of uncertainty, this is a time and place for the sentencing order to change from an “adversarial” approach to the preferred approach. A district court’s decision to impose a reduced sentence after a reasonable and sufficient period of time has already proven highly problematic or problematic. In such a case, the court may impose an “adversarial adjustment.” The court may set a sentencing rate at least for a “reasonable and sufficient degree of uncertainty.”(Regime § 54-1-202.04(4)) Although less detailed information exists of the type of adversarial adjustment the court may determine to be “adversarial,” it is believed that a jury with the experience of determining adversarial cases may not believe it to be wrong to impose a reduced sentence regardless of the uncertainty about the actual impact of that sentence. (For example, a defendant may consider the adversarial adjustment because an indeterminate increase in the sentence of 15 years would have a disproportionate effect on his/her potential sentence.)(The Federal Sentencing Regime Section 4 of the Sentencing Code (Regime § 56-1-202.