Crj 363 Policy Exam 2

Front 1

number of general purpose courts nationwide

Back 1

approximately 208 courts

Front 2

number of judges in the U.S.

Back 2

Over 9,000 judges

Front 3

What percentage of cases involve drug charges?

Back 3

33%

Front 4

What percentage of Michigan prisoners are locked up because of a drug offense?

Back 4

18%

Front 5

3 types of court jurisdictional boundaries

Back 5

geographical area - city or county etc.
subject matter - e.g. small claims
hierarchy - appellate courts review lower courts

Front 6

purpose of the dual court system in the U.S

Back 6

The U.S. is so large, we don't want someone from a different area with a different perspective/problems making decisions

Front 7

What are the reasons for formality and ritual in courts

Back 7

to reinforce the authority of the court

Front 8

the difference between seeking justice and seeking truth

Back 8

justice - thinking about the victim, however mostly focused on punishing offender
truth - court not really designed to find "truth" but on what can be proved (also allows guilty to plead innocent)

Front 9

common court mechanisms for achieving justice or truth and their limitations

Back 9

court must follow procedures that give the appearance of justice or fairness
defendants are allowed lawyers - the wealthier one is the better lawyer one gets
focuses on what is provable, not what is necessarily true

Front 10

common court mechanisms for achieving crime control and their limitations

Back 10

imprisonment -97% is eventually released (usually worse then when initially imprisoned)
court mandated rehab or counseling - defendants may not show up
restitution - defendants may not pay
probation - defendants may not comply with probationary rules
community service - defendants may not show up

Front 11

purpose of the adversarial system and how this may make justice, truth, or crime control objectives more difficult

Back 11

must prove that someone is guilty
this makes justice, truth, and crime control objective more difficult because the end result of what the justice system is looking for is what can be "proved" versus what actually happened; also allows the focus to be on winning without regard to the truth - this allows someone who is guilty to actually plead innocent and actually not be punished ultimately if it can't be proved

Front 12

discuss the question of whether judges should be able to make new laws or policies

Back 12

The judicial branch's role is to interpret the law; some feel that that means that they should interpret the written law literally, while others feel that it means they should read it in the spirit of how it was written (which could be interpreted as making new laws/policies).
Laws should be there to help society as a whole, not necessarily written just to be rules for the sake of rules.
There should be balance between the two schools of thought, and society as a whole (or even individually) is not necessarily helped anytime either of these are taken to the extreme

Front 13

concept of Doctrinalism and its strengths and limitations

Back 13

Strictly interpret the law and precedent in a literal fashion
The law is an end in itself; Views law as a science; Judges using this approach do not consider politics, experience, intuition, practical matters much

This approach keeps personal feelings out of rulings, all defendants are treated the same; does not allow for a lot of discretion, not all defendants are the same and should not always be treated exactly the same (may have extenuating circumstances that should be considered when ruling)

Front 14

concept of Legal Realism and its strengths and limitations

Back 14

Recognizes that judges frequently use experiential knowledge and intuition to reach conclusions (they aren’t robots that read law without any bias or thought).

Often, judges consider practical and political consequences of decisions.

This concept is seen by many as "legislating from the bench"; seen as making new laws and policies, which should be the prerogative of the legislature, not the judicial branch

Front 15

explain why most courts are not classified as true bureaucracies

Back 15

Don’t have divisions tied together by a single authoritarian structure or hierarchy

Front 16

the implications of the “workgroup” relationship between defense and prosecution

Back 16

•Since defense attorneys work with prosecutors, judges and other court officials every day

Often value these relationships more than the client

More likely to pressure defendants to plead guilty etc.

Front 17

explain some management procedures or policies might be helpful to limit the problems with informal court workgroups

Back 17

Master court calendar can limit the daily dealings between specific lawyers and judges

Front 18

difference between arbitration and mediation as alternative dispute resolution approaches

Back 18

Arbitration: An expert listens to both sides and makes a decision

Mediation: Less formal - a mediator works to develop an agreement through negotiation