Criminal Law Assignment 2022

Running head: CRIMINAL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1CRIMINAL LAW
1. In the criminal judicial system of the United States, the courtroom workgroup
refers to an informal arrangement among the judicial officer, the criminal prosecutor and
the criminal defence attorney mainly (Arazan, Bales & Blomberg, 2019). They are often
referred to as the courtroom actors as these individuals work together for processing the
cases that appear before the court.
The judge being the most significant and powerful member of the workgroup has
the responsibility of ensuring that justice prevails. He is able to influence the result of a
case by ruling and considering the matters of law, case procedure as well as sentence.
Next comes the criminal prosecutor or the prosecuting attorney. Prosecutors with the aid
from various assistants have the responsibility to decide the appropriate charges on the
defendant, prepare a case for every step of the process of the court. They even have the
responsibility to introduce evidence as well as witnesses for supporting the charges at
trial and even advising the police. When the defendant is convicted, the prosecutors make
recommendations for sentencing. They even enjoy a considerable amount of discretion
though sometimes limited by court decisions in many cases. For instance, prosecutors
have to disclose evidence requested by the defense as decided in the case of United
States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985). The main adversary of the prosecutor is the
defence counsel. As said before, as the prosecutor is liable for the preparation of the case
and the trial for the state, the defense counsel has the same responsibility for the
defendant. In the criminal justice system, there are several attorneys who are entrusted
with providing criminal defence. As per the interpretation of the 6th Amendment by the
Supreme Court, the defendants who can face imprisonment when convicted and who are
very poor that he cannot afford to pay the attorney, defence counsel is appointed for

2CRIMINAL LAW
them. This was decided in the case of Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977) by
Supreme Court.
2. The judges are actually the axle on which the justice wheels run. They manage the
pre- trial proceedings, rule on motions, supervision of jury trial, taking pleas of guilty,
imposing sentences in criminal cases and resolving appeals. The judges of the trial court
who preside on the judicial process and decide almost millions of decisions every year lie
at the base of the state judicial and the federal hierarchies. The decisions of the cases are
usually taken on the basis of the facts of the case, implying the relevant legislation,
precedents and other factors (Conrad Jr & Clements, 2018).
The other factors considered by judges while deciding criminal cases are whether
the offender is a 1st time offender or a repeating offender, whether the offender was acting
as an accessory or he is the main accused, whether the offender had committed the crime
under duress or personal stress, whether the offender is cruel towards the victim or
vindictive, destructive, whether someone else is hurt and whether the alleged crime was
committed in a way that was unlikely to hurt anyone else (Pina-Sánchez & Linacre,
2016). As per the section 32(a) of the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure, before
sentencing, the court must grant the counsel a chance to speak on defendant’s behavior.
In this way, judges make decisions in cases.
3. The trial penalty refers to the concept that has been accepted widely by many
major members in the criminal judicial system like the defendants, judges, prosecutors
and defense attorney (Tata & Gormley, 2016). The notion behind this is that the
defendants faces longer trials of sentence than they would have been sentenced by plea
bargaining.

3CRIMINAL LAW
The concept is actually intuitive. Longer trial sentences are required for inducing
settlements. Without this high rate of settlement, it would be very difficult for the courts
to bear the tremendous case load (Schneider, 2018). The trial penalty refers to the
difference between the sentence allowed in the plea bargaining prior to the trial versus the
sentence granted after the trial. This penalty is so pervasive and severe that it will
eliminate the constitutional right virtually to the trial. In order to avoid the penalty, the
accused person is bound to surrender many fundamental rights that are essential to any
fair judicial system. The US Supreme Court in the case of Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156
(2012), states that the criminal justice system is mostly a system of pleas and not the
system of trials.
4. The appellate court has the duty to examine the evidence record shown during
trial period in the court. It also considers the law applied by the trial court and also
decides whether the judgment given by the trial court was legally sound or not (Neubauer
& Meinhold, 2016). The appellate court is generally respectful towards the findings of
fact of the lower court such that whether a defendant had committed any particular act,
unless the fact is full of errors and hence will mainly concentrate on the application part
of the law to such facts by the trial court. When the appellate court finds that there lies no
defect in the decision of the lower court, the judgment is affirmed by it. However, if the
lower court finds any defect in legal point in the decision pronounced by lower court, it
can amend the decision for correcting the defect or it can even reverse the whole decision
or any part of it which the court thinks suitable. The appellate court even send back the
case to the lower court to rectify the remedy in further proceedings (Yoshino, 2016).

4CRIMINAL LAW
The differences between the direct appeals and the habeas corpus or interlocutory
appeals are as follows; the direct appeal refers to the appeal where the appellant files an
appeal against the order of a court to the next higher court to review whereas
interlocutory appeals are made usually in the court of first instance, that is, the court that
had decided the case (King, 2017). The direct appeals are made after the court has
decided the case absolutely whereas in interlocutory orders like denying the request of an
interim injunction and others, this order can be immediately appealed although the case
was not fully decided and disposed of. Again, the direct appeal occurs in the state courts
whereas the interlocutory appeals occur in federal courts.
5. Problem solving courts are those that address the problems underlying the
criminal behavior and form a current trade in the U.S legal system (Boldt, 2017). In the
year of 1989, a judge in Miami started taking practical approach towards the drug
addicted person, subjecting them to treatments instead of perpetuating the door from
court to prison. This resulted into the creating a drug court. This concept was started to be
used in the complex and difficult circumstances where social, legal as well as human
problems converge. About two thousand and eight hundred problem solving courts were
created in the year of 2008 with the intention for providing tool to resolve problem for
reducing recidivism. As per the Centre for Court Innovation, there are many principles
for making these courts effective. Better information must be made available to the staffs
by proper training whereas the defendant information to the justice officers. Community
engagement must be allowed. Offenders shall be made accountable with monitoring and
consequences must be there for non- compliance. However, there are criticisms too.
Judges have discretionary power, thus results can vary. Further, the judges apart from

5CRIMINAL LAW
having knowledge of law, must have ability to act like a social worker, accountant and
even therapist. Thus these courts have limitations too; instead the traditional courts are
always better option as they follow traditional methods of dealing the case which results
into consistent decision.

6CRIMINAL LAW
References:
Arazan, C. L., Bales, W. D., & Blomberg, T. G. (2019). Courtroom Context and
Sentencing. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 44(1), 23-44.
Boldt, R. C. (2017). Problem-solving courts. Reforming criminal justice: Pretrial and
trial processes, 3, 273-304.
Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977).
Conrad Jr, R. J., & Clements, K. L. (2018). The Vanishing Criminal Jury Trial: From
Trial Judges to Sentencing Judges. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 86, 99.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
King, N. J. (2017). Criminal Appeals.
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012).
Neubauer, D. W., & Meinhold, S. S. (2016). Judicial process: law, courts, and politics in
the United States. Nelson Education.
Pina-Sánchez, J., & Linacre, R. (2016). Refining the measurement of consistency in
sentencing: A methodological review. International Journal of Law, Crime and
Justice, 44, 68-87.
Schneider, R. (2018). How Big is Too Big?: The Potentially Coercive Effects of Plea
Discount on Innocent Defendants.
Tata, C., & Gormley, J. M. (2016). Sentencing and plea bargaining: Guilty pleas versus
trial verdicts. In Oxford Handbooks Online: Criminology & Criminal Justice.
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985).

7CRIMINAL LAW
Yoshino, K. (2016). Appellate deference in the age of facts. Wm. & Mary L. Rev., 58,
251.