The Entire Criminal Justice Process, Research Paper Example

The criminal trial system in the United States is heavily concerned with the rights of the accused and, as such, there is a necessity in the process to respect the rights of the accused while seeking justice in the court. It is a delicate balance that must be achieved through the vigilance of defense attorneys and the ethical strength of the court and prosecution. While the adversarial system in place is appropriate, there is a need to improved the system to better adhere to the rights of the accused.

The felony criminal process begins with the arrest of a suspect. Suspects are often arrested due to a complaint by others who accuse the suspect of a crime. Assuming that the process is carried out appropriately, the arrest is meant to detain a suspect and gather evidence for the trial process. After the arrest and detainment of a suspect, the trial process begins.

The first stage of the criminal case that takes place in court is the arraignment.  The arraignment is a formal reading of charges that are being leveled against a defendant. The arraignment is a pivotal moment in the trial because it is the time at which the defendant enters a plea. For felony trials, defendants must enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. If the defendant chooses to remain silent and not enter a plea, then the court will accept a plea of not guilty and pursue the ongoing trial accordingly.Because the arraignment is the point at which the defendant enters his or her plea, it determines the remaining trial proceedings.

The arraignment is an important part of the trial process because it is the first formal portion of it. Defendants are expected to present themselves formally and enter a plea on the advice of counsel (Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)). However, the arraignment is also the time at which a defendant may request counsel if indigent, and may, at times, enter a plea without the advice of counsel.  In addition to the entry of a plea, the judge will also rule on pretrial release and bail at the time of arraignment.  After the arraignment, the defendant will either be returned to holding facilities or released on bail, expected to return at the next scheduled meeting, which will likely be an evidentiary hearing.

Regardless of whether or not defendant is pleading guilty or not guilty, an evidentiary hearing is scheduled for the purpose of determining whether or not there is enough evidence to support the charges.  Defendants are entitled to attorneys, court appointed or hired, during this part of the trial process (Coleman v. Alabama).In addition, defendants facing federal felony charges are entitled to indictment by a Grand Jury.

During these early stages of a trial, some defendants may necessarily be held without conviction. This is typically necessary to protect the public or to prevent a suspect from fleeing from trial. While it may seem necessary, it also seems that the deprivation of liberty without conviction would be unconstitutional. According to Alan M. Dershowitz in his article “Imprisonment by Judicial Hunch,” the denial of bail is based on prediction of future behavior by the court. According to Dershowitz, this could not be constitutional because of the inability of any court to predict the future accurately, and the fact that holding defendants without conviction is a violation of the 5th Amendment.

While it would seem that Dershowitz has a good point about pretrial detention, necessity demands that some defendants be held prior to trial. Those with a history of skipping bail or who pose a clear and present danger to the community at large must not be released because of the inability of the court to try those defendants or protect the public. This seems to be an area in which improvement must be made in the criminal justice system. There must be a way to strike a balance between releasing dangerous or elusive criminals, and holding people in a manner that is unconstitutional.

Regardless of the status of pretrial detention, if a defendant has pleaded not guilty, then the process continues with the pretrial motions offered by defense and prosecution attorneys.  Pretrial motions are arguments and requests made by the attorneys to the court to set boundaries on evidence and the status of the trial based on the constitutionality of evidence. This can include bargaining between attorneys and arguing points to the judge based on the process up to this point. Typically, defense attorneys will move to dismiss a case based on evidence at this and subsequent points at the trial (Hale 37). Depending on the pretrial motions, evidence or witnesses may be excluded from the trial. This portion of the trial is basically the time at which attorneys must plan based upon the evidence that will be present in court. Cases may be won or lost based on the decisions of the court at this crucial stage.

Typically, felony criminal trials begin with the selection of the jury by the attorneys. This is a process by which attorneys weed out jurors that they feel will be biased toward the case. Juror selection involves the questioning and dismissal of potential jurors based on criteria set by the attorneys for both sides. This step is skipped if a defendant elects to not be tried by a jury. However, all felony defendants have the right to a trial by jury (Duncan v. Louisiana).

Following jury selection, opening statements are delivered. The prosecution, burdened with the need to prove its case, delivers its statement first. The opening statement is delivered by explanation of the case and how it will be proven. The defense typically delivers its opening statement with an alternative interpretation of the facts after the prosecution has completed its statement. Though no evidence is presented during the opening statement, it serves as the first chance that the jury has to hear the case from both sides, and serves as a prologue to the argument that is to be presented by both sides during the rest of the trial.

After the opening statements, the presentation of evidence begins with the testimony and cross examination of witnesses. This is when the case-in-chief is delivered through the questioning of witnesses and the presentation of evidence through this questioning.  First the prosecution argues its case by calling witnesses for the state. The defense cross examines each witness and attempts to rebut the arguments of the state. Once the prosecution rests its case, the defense is allowed to call witnesses to deliver testimony with the prosecution acting to rebut during cross examination. During this process, the key points of argument are given through testimony, and the cases of the defense and prosecution are delivered.

Once the defense rests its case, the presentation of the case-in-chief portion of the trial comes to an end and closing arguments are delivered. The closing arguments serve as the summation of the case and the last chance for both sides to present arguments tying the case together. First the prosecution, then the defense must deliver a closing argument that ties the case together in order to convince the jury, who are then given instructions and deliberate on the verdict behind closed doors. Once the deliberation is complete, jurors return to the court to render the verdict. If the defendant is found not guilty, the process ends and he or she is released. However, if the defendant is found guilty, the process must continue.

The trial is defined by the adversarial nature of the proceedings. According to Sandra Beatriz Hale in her book The Discourse of Court Interpreting, the adversarial system puts the truth as a decision to be made by the jury based on arguments presented. According to Hale, this system makes words in to powerful tools that are immensely important in understanding the truth (Hale 32). For this reason, it seems that there are apparent problems with finding the truth through argument. However, these problems are necessary, and it does not seem that any real improvement could be made concerning the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings. There are no possible ways to discern the truth to a certainty, and forcing the prosecution to prove the guilt of a defendant seems to be the best way to ensure fairness while carrying out the job of the court to seek justice in criminal cases.

The most immediate follow up to a guilty verdict is the sentencing phase of the trial. Depending on the nature of the crime, a judge will sentence a guilty felon to punishment of some kind. In capital cases, a follow up hearing will be held to determine whether or not the convicted should be given the death penalty. These hearings focus on character witnesses and are used to determine the appropriate punishment for the crime. In these cases, a jury will decide the fate of the defendant. In other cases, a judge sentences the defendant based on the lawful punishment.

Once a defendant has been sentenced, he or she begins serving his or her punishment. However, the process is not necessarily over. Eligible convicts may appeal their convictions, entering in to the appeals process. This process is defined by the review of evidence by an appeals court and the granting or denial of a new trial based upon the evidence presented and the proceedings of the court.

Though the adversarial system is sound, the problem lies with pretrial detention. Suspects are held without conviction. Though this is necessary, the fact remains that pretrial detention denies liberty to people who have not been convicted of any crime and should be considered innocent until proven guilty. The system as it exists is flawed, regardless of the possibility of correction.

References

Dershowitz, Alan M.(1971) “Imprisonment by Judicial Hunch” in American Bar Association                        Journal Volume 57: Pp 559-564.

Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U. S. 1 (1970)

Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968)

Hale, Sandra Beatriz (2004), The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Philidelphia, PA:  John Benjamins BV. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)