A plea bargain is a procedure that prosecutors use to avoid a trial as juries or even judges can be unpredictable in their behavior and may rule against them. Prosecutors like sure things as does the State and a plea bargain gains an admission of guilt without the right to an appeal in exchange for leniency. However, a plea bargain may induce prosecutors to over-charge a suspect in an attempt to bully them into gaining a plea bargain. Plea bargains are also not conducted in open court so there is a lack of transparency that occurs (Carp, Stidham, Manning, & Holmes, 2017, p. 226).
Judicial Restraint is a stricter interpretation of the law based upon its constitutional merits, legislative merits or legal precedent. One important aspect is that …show more content…
There are six parties involved in a criminal trial: prosecutors, defendant(s), attorneys, judges, juries and victims. One type of civil action is a Negligent Tort. The website Tort Laws defines it is as “not considered to be a deliberate action but is present when an individual or entity fails to act as a reasonable person to someone whom they owe a duty to,” (Tort Laws, n.d.). Medical Malpractice falls under a negligent tort because in such a case the doctor or medical staff is required to operate in a responsible such as to do no harm to the individual. I remember when I lived in Las Vegas there was an outbreak of Hepatitis C that resulted in at least one fatality at a chain of endoscopy clinics that was due to improper usage and disposal of needles and other medical equipment at the labs. This case was settled in 2014 for $524 million (Thevenot, 2014, p.xx). Under Nevada law, because the civil action occurred in Las Vegas and totaled more than $10,000 it is heard by the Clark County Civil Court (Clark County Courts, n.d.). According to the Clark County Court website, defendants must be served a copy of the lawsuit and have 20 days to respond. From there they meet to discuss procedures such as discovery, a possible settlement or alternative methods of resolution. If need be it continues on to scheduling a trial where it can be tried before a judge or a jury if both parties …show more content…
It is used by persons convicted in a state criminal trial to be granted an appeal in federal court. A federally protected right such as due process must be addressed in the writ or the plea will be dismissed (Carp, Stidham, Manning, & Holmes, 2017, p. 70). A Writ of Mandamus is a court order to a lower court commanding a government official to perform an official duty or correct an abuse of discretion (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). Both writs are used in post-conviction criminal cases in terms of gaining a new trial or having their conviction over-turned in an appellate court.
Arizona House Bill 2537 was passed in May 2016 which increased the number of Arizona Supreme Court justices from five to seven. Gov. Doug Ducey claims that the increased number of justices will increase efficiency, hear more cases and issue more opinions. The Democratic legislators however claim that this move is an attempt to stack the Supreme Court with more conservative Republican justices (Sanchez, 2016, p.xx).
Judicial Restraint is a stricter interpretation of the law based upon its constitutional merits, legislative merits or legal precedent. One important aspect is that …show more content…
There are six parties involved in a criminal trial: prosecutors, defendant(s), attorneys, judges, juries and victims. One type of civil action is a Negligent Tort. The website Tort Laws defines it is as “not considered to be a deliberate action but is present when an individual or entity fails to act as a reasonable person to someone whom they owe a duty to,” (Tort Laws, n.d.). Medical Malpractice falls under a negligent tort because in such a case the doctor or medical staff is required to operate in a responsible such as to do no harm to the individual. I remember when I lived in Las Vegas there was an outbreak of Hepatitis C that resulted in at least one fatality at a chain of endoscopy clinics that was due to improper usage and disposal of needles and other medical equipment at the labs. This case was settled in 2014 for $524 million (Thevenot, 2014, p.xx). Under Nevada law, because the civil action occurred in Las Vegas and totaled more than $10,000 it is heard by the Clark County Civil Court (Clark County Courts, n.d.). According to the Clark County Court website, defendants must be served a copy of the lawsuit and have 20 days to respond. From there they meet to discuss procedures such as discovery, a possible settlement or alternative methods of resolution. If need be it continues on to scheduling a trial where it can be tried before a judge or a jury if both parties …show more content…
It is used by persons convicted in a state criminal trial to be granted an appeal in federal court. A federally protected right such as due process must be addressed in the writ or the plea will be dismissed (Carp, Stidham, Manning, & Holmes, 2017, p. 70). A Writ of Mandamus is a court order to a lower court commanding a government official to perform an official duty or correct an abuse of discretion (Legal Information Institute, n.d.). Both writs are used in post-conviction criminal cases in terms of gaining a new trial or having their conviction over-turned in an appellate court.
Arizona House Bill 2537 was passed in May 2016 which increased the number of Arizona Supreme Court justices from five to seven. Gov. Doug Ducey claims that the increased number of justices will increase efficiency, hear more cases and issue more opinions. The Democratic legislators however claim that this move is an attempt to stack the Supreme Court with more conservative Republican justices (Sanchez, 2016, p.xx).