Kenneth manguil

Block- B

Assignment

1.

 Exclusive jurisdiction. Only federal courts have authority to hear , state courts cannot.
 Concurrent Jurisdiction. Federal or state courts could hear.
 Original Jurisdiction. Court is the first one to hear case.
 Appelate Jurisdiction. Court can only hear a case on appeal.
 The original jurisdiction is set forth in the United States Code. The Supreme Court has
original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear disputes between different states -- meaning that no
other federal court can hear such a dispute. An example of such a case is the 1998 case of State
of New Jersey v. State of New York.

2.
3. Key Difference: A lawyer is a person who practices law, whereas a judge is a person who
presides over the law. ... It is the job of lawyer to advise their clients in all aspects of the law.
They may also prepare a case for their clients and argue it on their behalf in a court of law.
There are three major differences between trial-level courts and appellate-level courts:
witnesses and exhibits, judges, and. Juries
4. The judge and jury must work together to guarantee a fair and unbiased hearing and
determination of guilt in criminal trials. ... The judge instructs the jury regarding its job; he
assists the jury by explaining court procedure and the meaning of the laws it must use to
make its final determinations. Article III of the United States Constitution charges the judicial
system with interpreting the law. Criminal judges administer that function; they manage
cases, set schedules, hear motions and empanel juries. Criminal cases may begin in one
court for arraignment, move to another for motions before trial and end up in another for the
trial itself. Although clerks and court staff may issue notices and maintain calendars, judges
are responsible for making the decisions implicit in moving numbers of individual,
occasionally complex, emotional or notorious, cases along on a timely basis.
5. There are no explicit requirements in the U.S. Constitution for a person to be nominated to
become a Supreme Court justice. No age, education, job experience, or citizenship rules
exist. In fact, according to the Constitution, a Supreme Court justice does not need to even
have a law degree
6. When judges impose a sentence there is always a question of discretion against the rule of
law. ... The judge uses' his or hers own moral judgement at his discretion to create a
sentence which will not only rehabilitate the offender but also act as a deterrence to the
general public. noun. Discretion is defined as the right of someone to make choices or the
quality of someone who is careful about what they do or say. An example of discretion is the
ability of a juror to determine a verdict. An example of discretion is not talking about politics
at family dinners.
7. A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part
of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline,
and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is
supposed to conduct the trial impartially and, typically, in an open court. The
 judge hears all the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the barristers
or solicitors of the case, assesses the credibility and arguments of the parties,
and then issues a ruling on the matter at hand based on his or her interpretation
of the law and his or her own personal judgment. In some jurisdictions, the
judge's powers may be shared with a jury. In inquisitorial systemsof criminal
investigation, a judge might also be an examining magistrate.
8. A motion to quash is a request to a court to render a previous decision of that court or a
lower judicial body null or invalid. It can arise out of mistakes made by any lawyer in a court
proceeding. ... For example, a party that receives improper service of process The  motion 
to  quash  shall  be  in writing,  signed  by  the  accused  or  his  counsel  and  shall 
distinctly specify  its  factual  and  legal  grounds.  The  court  shall  consider  no 
ground  other  than  those  stated  in  the  motion,  except  lack  of jurisdiction over the
offense charged. 
9. An arraignment is a court proceeding at which a criminal defendant is formally
advised of the charges against him and is asked to enter a plea to the charges.
In many states, the court may also decide at arraignment whether the defendant
will be released pending trial.
10. "The arraignment of the accused involves the calling of the accused to the bar of that court
to plead to the charge made against him.... ... However, if he pleads not guilty or refuses to
plead, then the court must proceed to enter a plea of not guilty and proceed with the trial
Arraignment is required by the 1987 Constitution. Our Rules of
Court implement it by providing that the arraignment of an
accused must be done in open court by the judge or the clerk
of court; by furnishing the accused with a copy of the
complaint or information, reading it in a language known to
him; and asking the accused whether he pleads guilty or not
guilty. The same rules provide that the accused must be
present at the arraignment and must personally enter his plea.
11. The arraignment of the accused involves the calling of the accused to the bar of that court to
plead to the charge made against him.... ... However, if he pleads not guilty or refuses to
plead, then the court must proceed to enter a plea of not guilty and proceed with the trial. If
the defendant refuses to enter a plea—or to even speak—then the judge will typically enteral
not guilty plea on his or her behalf. (The judge may first try to determine why the
defendant won't plead and convince him or her to do so.)
12. The main purpose of a guilty plea is to produce a final conclusion to a criminal
case. Once a defendant enters a guilty plea, the prosecutor has no further
obligation to introduce evidence of the defendant's guilt. A pleading defendant
waives the right to raise most objections to police, prosecutorial, or judicial
behavior that could have been raised on appeal after a trial and conviction.
However, the defendant may still appeal issues relating to the guilty plea
process, to events that occur after the guilty plea (e.g., improprieties in
sentencing), to the essential invalidity of the court's "jurisdiction," and to a
limited number of constitutional violations. The Supreme Court has had
 difficulty identifying dividing lines for which constitutional issues may be
raised post-plea. Appellate courts also have upheld the ability of prosecutors to
demand, as part of a plea bargain, a waiver of the right to appeal some issues
relating to sentencing. In general, the courts have shown a strong preference for
maintaining the finality of guilty pleas.
13. Every state constitution guarantees the right to counsel for a person charged with a
criminal offense. State laws provide framework for courts that carry out the task of
ensuring that defendants are aware of their right to counsel and that counsel is
appointed in a reasonable amount of time. A summary and chart provide for
information on these laws.
14. Every state constitution guarantees the right to counsel for a person charged with a
criminal offense. State laws provide framework for courts that carry out the task of
ensuring that defendants are aware of their right to counsel and that counsel is
appointed in a reasonable amount of time. A summary and chart provide for
information on these laws. It means that the offender either chooses to have a judge hear
the case and waives their right to a jury trial, or they choose to have a jury hear their trial. ...
At the trial, both sides will give testimony and present their evidence. The judge or jury will
issue a ruling on the case.