AP Government - Unit 4
FINAL QUIZLET FOR TROY HIGH SCHOOL
Terms in this set (51)
- a lawyer employed at public expense in a criminal trial to represent a defendant who is unable to afford legal assistance
- can't be chosen but can request for a different one
Objection: Facts in the Record
The witnesses should not wander too far from the given facts. They may infer from the facts, but if opposing attorney believes they have gone beyond the scope of the given facts then an objection should be made.
To be admissible, any offer of evidence must be relevant to an issue in the trial. Either direct or circumstantial evidence may be admitted in court. Direct evidence proves the fact asserted without requiring an inference. A piece of circumstantial evidence is a fact which if shown to exist suggest the existence of an additional fact.
Objection: Laying a Proper Foundation
To establish relevance you may need to lay a foundation. That is, you need to demonstrate that a piece of circumstantial evidence supports an inference you wish to make.
Objection: Personal Knowledge
The witness must have a personal knowledge of the matter. Only if the witness has directly observed an event may the witness testify about it.
Objection: Character Evidence
Witnesses generally testify about a person's character unless character is an issue. In criminal trials, defense may introduce evidence of the defendant's good character, and if relevant, show the bad character of persons important to the prosecution's case.
Witnesses may not normally give their opinions on the stand. Judges and juries are to draw their own conclusions from the evidence. Qualified expert opinion would be an exception.
If a witness offers an out of court statement to prove a matter asserted in the witness' own testimony, the statement is hearsay. Because these statements are unreliable, these statements ordinarily may not be used to prove the truth of the witness' testimony.
When asking an appropriately phrased question to a witness, especially on cross examination where YES and NO questions may be offered, if the witness fails to answer the question, an objection should be made by the lawyer who asked the question. On cross, the lawyer may even ask the judge to answer YES or NO.
Any conversation and/or physical communique between an attorney & client, doctor & patient, clergy & congregation member, or husband & wife are privileged. That is, these communications are inadmissible in a court of law.
Objection: Leading Questions
As a general rule, the direct examiner is prohibited from asking leading questions; he/she cannot ask questions that suggest the desired answer. Leading questions are allowed on cross-examination.
Objection: Argumentative Questions
Questions asked by the attorneys should elicit facts. An argumentative question challenges the witness about an inference in the case. Attorneys should also refrain from making statements rather than questions.
Objection: Asked and Answered
On direct examination, the repetition of a question is improper; but the cross-examiner may want to ask the question different ways to probe the certainty of the witness.
Objection: Outside the Scope of Cross-Examination
Re-direct examination is limited to issues raised by the opposing attorney on cross-examination.
a court order to appear to answer questions or provide testimony
Considerations when judge sets bail
(1) posted bail schedules
(2) seriousness of the alleged crime
(3) past criminal record/outstanding warrants
(4) defendant's ties to the community
(5) probability of defendant making it to court appearances
(6) risk to public safety
(7) potential flight risk
the questioning of a witness by the party that has called that witness to give evidence, in order to support the case that is being made
limited to questioning only on matters that were raised during direct examination
- outlines the facts
- each party's opportunity to set the basic scene for the jurors, introduce them to the core dispute(s) in the case, and provide a general roadmap of how the trial is expected to unfold
each party reminds jurors about key evidence and tries to persuade them in their favor
- legal party responsible for presenting the case in a criminal trial against an individual accused of breaking the law
- in a court case, the plaintiff
- the State
- a criminal defense lawyer, also known as a defense attorney, is a lawyer specializing in the defense of individuals and companies charged with criminal activity
- there can be public or private defense attorneys
- everyone is given the right to a public defense attorney
to call for the review of the trial because of a disputed point of law or a constitutional violation
Necessary to conduct a search
- purpose is to decide whether there is probable cause to prosecute someone for a felony crime
- operates in secrecy and the normal rules of evidence do not apply
- the prosecutor runs the proceedings and no judge is present
- majority vote is needed to hold trial
Security in the courtroom
Jury vote for acquittal
when someone is allowed to leave the prison before a trial on their own recognizance
judgement that a crime has been committed or is in the process of being committed
a deal worked out by prosecution and defense where the accused pleads "guilty" to a lesser charge in order to avoid prosecution on a more severe charge
Reasons for plea bargains
(1) risk of going to trial
(2) not enough resources to try every criminal charge filed
(3) sensitivity to the interests and concerns of the victim who would have to testify against the defendant in a trial
completes bonding paperwork with an accused person, receive payments and track down the person if he fails to appear in court
guarantees for a free trial
- the jury selection process
- prosecution and defense choose jurors from those available
- both sides may have jurors dismissed by either using peremptory challenges or challenges for cause
Reasons for juror dismissal
- peremptory (no reason)
- challenge for cause (similar situation experienced, impartial juror, juror knows either side)
prosecution presents its case before a judge to determine if there is a sufficient evidence to hold a trial
Mistrial or hung jury
jury that cannot arrive at a unanimous decision
must be read as suspect is getting arrested
- rule that excludes illegally obtained evidence from the trail
- purpose: so that the evidence cannot be used in trial and thus may result in a guilty or not guilty because of it
formal charges are presented and a plea is entered
To be found guilty of a felony...
- a person must commit the crime
- be convicted by the jury and proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt
- jurors disregard the judge's instructions, like considering possible sentence if found guilty talking to witnesses outside of court
- can lead to a mistrial
Burden of proof
- rests with the prosecution
Ex post facto laws
- a law which is enacted and then retroactively applied
- unconstitutional: Art. I, Sec. 9 and 10
- conditional release of a prisoner
- will be monitored by a Parole officer
- must stay "clean" while on parole or will be returned to prison
- suspending of a sentence in return for a promise of good behavior
- may include time in the county jail
judge agrees/disagrees with objection
showing open disrespect for the court
protection against unfair laws and unfair procedures
guilt or innocence is determined by attorneys presenting their case before a jury and/or judge
Country's leading law enforcement officer
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Test Preparation TOEIC, SAT, TOEFL
Criminal Justice: Criminal Trial/Punishment Review
CJS 110 Chapter 10
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Mechanical Drawing Chapter 6 Muitiview Drawing.
UW 1020 Vocab Quiz
NSC 2126 MIDTERM 2