Presentation on theme: "THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM DEFINED: THE FORMAL SYSTEM ESTABLISHED BY THE U.S. FOR MAINTAINING SOCIAL CONTROL AND HANDLING CRIMINAL CONDUCT."— Presentation transcript:
THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM DEFINED: THE FORMAL SYSTEM ESTABLISHED BY THE U.S. FOR MAINTAINING SOCIAL CONTROL AND HANDLING CRIMINAL CONDUCT
FUNCTIONAL PURPOSES OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM PROTECT CITIZENS AND PROPERTY PRESERVE PEACE AND MAINTAIN PUBLIC ORDER DETECT AND RESPOND TO CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR INVESTIGATE CRIME APPREHEND, PROSECUTE, DEFEND, CONVICT, PUNISH, AND REHABILITATE CRIMINALS PROTECT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
WHETHER A DEFENDANT IS PROCESSED THROUGH FED/STATE SYSTEMS IS DETERMINED BY: WHETHER THE CRIME WAS A FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL OFFENSE WHETHER IT WAS COMMITTED BY AN ADULT OR JUVENILE WHETHER IT WAS A SERIOUS OFFENSE
FOUR COMPONENTS OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 1. LAW ENFORCEMENT 2. PROSECUTION/DEFENSE 3. JUDICIARY 4. CORRECTIONS
THE TITLES OF COURTS IN OHIO SUPREME COURT OF OHIO COURT OF APPEALS COMMON PLEAS COUNTY COURT MUNICIPAL COURT OF CLAIMS MAYOR’S COURT
OHIO SUPREME COURT One chief justice Six justices All elected for 6 year terms Majority constitutes a quorum
The Ohio Appellate Courts Each has 3 or more judges Appeals of judgment from lower courts, except where the death penalty has been imposed Cases involving constitutional issues Review of matters related to final orders or actions of administrative officers or agencies as provided by law
FIVE MATTERS OVER WHICH THE OHIO SUPREME COURT HAS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION 1. QUO WARRANTO 2. MANDAMUS 3. HABEAS CORPUS 4. PROHIBITION 5. PROCEDENDO
QUO WARRANTO A hearing to determine by what authority someone has an office or franchise or liberty. A writ or order issuable by the State, through which it demands an individual to show by what right he or she exercises an authority that can only be exercised through grant or franchise emanating from the State. A writ or order issuable by the State, through which it demands an individual to show by what right he or she exercises an authority that can only be exercised through grant or franchise emanating from the State.
MANDAMUS A writ issued by a superior court directed to an inferior court, a corporation, an officer, etc., commanding the performance of a specified act within the scope of its/his duty, or directing the restoration of the complainant to rights or privileges of which he has been illegally deprived A writ issued by a superior court directed to an inferior court, a corporation, an officer, etc., commanding the performance of a specified act within the scope of its/his duty, or directing the restoration of the complainant to rights or privileges of which he has been illegally deprived.
HABEAS CORPUS “That you have the body” A writ to bring a person before a court or a judge, most frequently used to ensure that a person's imprisonment, detention, or commitment is legal.
PROHIBITION Writ issued by the Supreme Court to a judge presiding over a suit in an inferior court. The writ of prohibition mandates the inferior court to cease any action over the case because it may not fall within that inferior court's jurisdiction. The document is also issued at times when it is deemed that an inferior court is acting outside the normal rules and procedures in the examination of a case.
PROCEDENDO A writ issued which directs a lower court to proceed in deciding a matter before it.
State v. Jones, 121 Ohio St.3d 103, 2009-Ohio-316. Extraterritorial traffic stop — A law- enforcement officer who personally observes a traffic violation while outside the officer’s statutory territorial jurisdiction has probable cause to make a traffic stop; the stop is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
OFFENSES ARE DIVIDED INTO 2 BROAD CLASSES FELONYMISDEMEANOR
The Court of Common Pleas One court of common pleas established in each county of the state Has original jurisdiction over all justiciable matters Referred to as general jurisdiction This means that at local level, the court can initially address any matter, either civil or criminal Also referred to as the general trial court for those charged with any felony
FELONIES A FELONY IS AN OFFENSE DEFINED BY LAW AS A FELONY
Felonies range from F5 to F1, with a felony 5 being the least serious and a felony 1, the most serious. Carrying from one year in prison up to the death penalty.
Municipal/County Court Rule on criminal misdemeanors Hold preliminary hearings for felonies The court has jurisdiction over civil actions up to $15,000 Traffic and parking offenses Violations of municipal ordinances Trial de novo (new trial) for cases on appeal from a court not of record
MISDEMEANORS MISDEMEANORS IS AN OFFENSE DEINED BY LAW AS A MISDEMEANOR
Misdemeanors ranged from a minor misdemeanor to an M1, with MM being the least serious and an M1, the most serious. MM only carries a monetary punishment. M1 can carry up to 6 months in county jail.
TWO PURPOSES OF FELONY SENTENCING TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM FURTURE CRIME BY THE OFFENDER AND OTHERS PUNISH THE OFFENDER
MAYOR’S COURTS The mayor or an appointed mayor’s court magistrate may hear and determine cases involving: a. The violation of municipal ordinances (minor criminal matters) b. Traffic laws c. Parking regulations The court is considered one of limited jurisdiction and a court not of record
FOUR NEEDS A COURT IS REQUIRED TO CONSIDER WHEN IMPOSING A FELONY SENTENCE 1. THE NEED FOR INCAPACITATING THE OFFENDER 2. THE NEED FOR DETERRING THE OFFENDER AND OTHERS FROM FUTURE CRIMES 3. THE NEED TO REHABILITATE THE OFFENDER 4. THE NEED FOR MAKING RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
A FELONY SENTENCE IMPOSED BY THE COURT MUST SATISFY 3 REQUIREMENTS: 1. IT MUST BE REASONABLY CALCULATED TO ACHIEVE THE CONSIDERATIONS OF THE COURT 2. IT MUST BE COMMENSURATE WITH AND NOT DEMEANING TO THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENDER’S CONDUCT AND IT’S IMPACT ON THE VICTIM
3. IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH SENTENCES IMPOSED FOR SIMILAR CRIMES COMMITTED BY OTHER OFFENDERS WITH SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS A FELONY SENTENCE IMPOSED BY THE COURT MUST SATISFY 3 REQUIREMENTS:
ELEVEN SEQUENTIAL STEPS NECESSARY TO PROCESS AN ADULT FELON THROUGH THE OHIO CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 1. INVESTIGATION 2. ARREST 3. BOOKING 4. INITIAL APPERANCE 5. PRELIMINARY HEARING 6. GRAND JURY
7. ARRAINGMENT 8. PRE-TRIAL MOTIONS AND HEARINGS 9. TRIAL 10. SENTENCING 11. APPEAL ELEVEN SEQUENTIAL STEPS NECESSARY TO PROCESS AN ADULT FELON THROUGH THE OHIO CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
THE STATE OF OHIO RECOGNIZES 4 PLEAS 1. NOT GUILTY 2. NOT GUILTY BE REASON OF INSANITY (NGRI) 3. GUILTY 4. NO CONTEST
SEVEN SEQUENTIAL STEPS NECESSARY FOR PROCESSING AN ADULT MISDEMEANOR OFFENDER THROUGH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 1. INVESTIGATION 2. ARRST/SUMMONS/CITATION 3. INITIAL APPEARANCE 4. ARRAIGNMENT 5. TRIAL 6. SENTENCING 7. APPEAL
NINE STAGES OF THE JUVENILE PROCESS IN SEQUENCE ARE: 1. INVESTIGATION 2. TAKING INTO CUSTODY 3. INTAKE/DETENTION 4. FORMAL COMPLAINT 5. PRE-ADJUDICATON HEARING 6. PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 7. ADJUDICATION HEARING 8. DISPOSITION 9. APPEAL
Others involved in Ohio’s Justice System The coroner or medical examiner’s office Legal aid offices Victim/witness assistance and advocate centers Crisis intervention counselors Battered women’s shelters and service organizations Domestic violence counselors Rehabilitation centers (narcotics and alcohol treatment centers)
Others involved in Ohio’s Justice System County mental health agencies Human services agencies County children services Consumer protection agencies
Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct (1966) The defendant was arrested at his home for a rape and taken to the police station. While there, the victim identified him as the rapist. The police took the defendant to an interrogation room, where he was questioned by two police officers. These officers later testified at trial that the defendant was not advised that he had a right to have an attorney present during his questioning. The officers also testified that the defendant was not told that he had a right to be free from self incrimination. The defendant signed a statement that contained a pre- prepared clause stating that he had full knowledge of his legal rights. At trial, the written confession was admitted against the defendant and he was convicted.
Miranda v. Arizona ISSUE: Whether the written confession given by the defendant was obtained in violation of the defendant‘s Fifth Amendment right to be free from compulsion? HELD: Yes. The written confession by the defendant was obtained in violation of the defendant‘s Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self incrimination HELD: Yes. The written confession by the defendant was obtained in violation of the defendant‘s Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self incrimination.
Miranda v. Arizona The Court defined a custodial interrogation as questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way… Custodial Interrogation. Cops+Custody+Questioning=Miranda
Miranda v. Arizona However, if the individual indicates in any manner that he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease. Similarly, if the individual states that he wants an attorney, the interrogation must cease until an attorney is present.
Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct (1968) Police Detective McFadden had been a police officer for 39 years. He served 35 years of those years as a detective and 30 of those years walking a beat in downtown Cleveland. At approximately 2:30 p.m. on October 31, 1963, Officer McFadden was patrolling in plain clothes. Two men, Chilton and the defendant, standing on a corner, attracted his attention. He had never seen the men before, and he was unable to say precisely what first drew his eye to them. His interest aroused, Officer McFadden watched the two men. He saw one man leave the other and walk past several stores.
Terry v. Ohio The suspect paused and looked in a store window, then walked a short distance, turned around and walked back toward the corner, pausing again to look in the same store window. Then the second suspect did the same. This was repeated approximately a dozen times. At one point, a third man approached the suspects, engaged them in a brief conversation, and left. Chilton and the defendant resumed their routine for another minutes before leaving to meet with the third man. Officer McFadden testified that he suspected the men were casing a job, a stick-up, ‖ and that he feared they may have a gun. Officer McFadden approached the three men, identified himself and asked for their names. The suspects mumbled something in response.
Terry v. Ohio Officer McFadden grabbed the defendant, spun him around and patted down the outside of his clothing. Officer McFadden felt a pistol in the defendant‘s left breast pocket of his overcoat, which he retrieved. Officer McFadden then patted down Chilton. He felt and retrieved another handgun from his overcoat. Officer McFadden patted down the third man, Katz, but found no weapon. The government charged Chilton and the defendant with carrying concealed weapons.
Terry v. Ohio ISSUES: 1. Whether the detective‘s actions amounted to a seizure? 2. Whether the detective‘s actions amounted a search?HELD: 1. Yes. Detective McFadden seized the defendant when he grabbed him. 2. Yes. Detective McFadden searched the defendant when he put his hands on the defendant‘s person.
Terry v. Ohio The Court permitted Detective McFadden to conduct the limited intrusions of stopping the suspects based on articulable (reasonable) suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. The Court also found that Detective McFadden demonstrated reasonable suspicion that the men were armed and dangerous. Therefore, the Court allowed his limited intrusion onto their persons in search of weapons. While both standards are less than probable cause, the Court acknowledged that limited intrusions, based on articulated, reasonable suspicion can be reasonable.
BASIC DEFINITIONS “Original jurisdiction” - means the authority to hear and decide an issue first, where the issue can be initiated. “Appellate jurisdiction” - means the authority to review a decision of a lower court. “Court of limited jurisdiction” - means that the court’s authority is restricted to specified issues or questions. “Court of record” - those in which a final record of the proceedings is made.
“Court not of record” - those in which in no record is made, though a docket and notes may be kept. “General jurisdiction” - means the court has authority to hear and decide all issues that come before it unless specifically limited by law to another court. “Presiding judge” - in courts having more than one judge, one of them may be elected to carry out the administrative duties and powers for the functioning of the court.