COURTS

Law in the United States is also made by courts. This system of law, which originated in England and gives courts lawmaking power, is called common law . In this system, court decisions establish legal principles and rules of law.

There are two types of courts in the United States : trial and appeals.

Trial courts listen to testimony, consider evidence, and decide the facts in disputed situations. Some trials have a jury, a group of ordinary citizens whose job is to decide the facts of the case. Once a trial court has made a decision, the losing party may be able to appeal the decision to an appellate (appeals) court.

In an appeals court , one party presents arguments asking the court to change the decision of the trial court. The other party presents arguments supporting the decision of the trial court. There are no juries or witnesses and no evidence is presented. Only lawyers usually appear before judges (who often sit in three-judge courts) to make legal arguments. Not all cases that were lost at a trial can be appealed. Usually an appeal is possible only when there is a claim that the trial court has committed an error of law . An error of law occurs when the judge makes a mistake as to the law applicable in the case (e.g., gives the wrong instructions to the jury or permits evidence that should not have been allowed). Many errors in a trial are considered minor as long as they do not affect the outcome of the trial. In cases involving minor errors, the trial court decision will not be reversed.

When an appeals court decides a case, it will issue a written opinion or ruling . This opinion sets a precedent for similar cases in the future. All lower courts in the place where the decision was made must follow the precedent set in the opinion. This is what is meant by courts making law' However, a higher court or a court in another area can disagree with this precedent.

Cases in appellate courts are usually heard by more than one judge. Typically, three judges (or justices , as appellate judges are sometimes called) decide such cases. Occasionally there are as many as nine, the usual number of justices who hear and decide all cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

When all the judges cannot agree on a decision, two or more written opinions may be issued in the same case. The judges vote and the majority opinion states the decision of the court. The judges disagreeing with the majority may issue a separate document called a dissenting opinion , which states the reasons for the disagreement. In some instances, judges agreeing with the majority, but for different reasons, may write a concurring opinion .

Dissenting opinions are very important because their reasoning may become the basis of future majority opinions as society and the views of judges on appellate courts change.

 

 

 

 

 

review questions

•  What specific power do courts have in common law countries?

•  What are the two principal types of courts in the United States ?

•  How do trial courts deal with the cases?

•  Who presents arguments in appellate courts and for what reason?

•  What can serve as ground for appeal?

•  Explain the term error of law ?

•  How do trial courts decide cases and how do appellate courts do that?

•  How many justices usually sit in appellate courts?

•  What is the usual number of justices in the Supreme Court of the United States ?

•  What happens when judges cannot agree on a decision?

•  What is a dissenting and what a concurring decision?

 

CASE 1: Taking a Coat by Mistake

Peter Jannings was having his usual 10 o'clock coffee in his favorite café last Tuesday. He has just been to his bank where he withdrew his last weeks salary with a 26% raise. It gave him great pleasure to count the money and while doing so, he forgot about the time. On his way out, being in a hurry since he was already late for an appointment, he took the coat from a hanger, put it on and jumped into the first taxi. When he wanted to pay for the ride, he realized that the coat was not his but looked exactly the same. Having checked it thoroughly, he found two hidden inside pockets and in them three bundles of $ 10,000 each in brand new hundred-Dollar bills. The taxi driver saw the money and observed the man's feverish behavior, so when his guest left the car, the cabby immediately informed the police. Peter Jannings was arrested half an hour later in front of a locker set at a Brooklin subway station while trying to squeeze the coat into one of the lockers. He is now awaiting trial as the prime suspect for the bank robbery that took place last Tuesday in the very same bank where he picked up his salary. On the afternoon of his arrest, he was recognized by two bank clerks at the line-up.

CASE 2: Bad Neighbors

Sally and Ringo, both slightly over 20, got married secretly in a Lucky Horse-Shoe Drive in Chapel in Nevada . They had some money they have saved from their last three-week job and they intended to try their luck in Las Vegas . When they woke up two days later in a cheap Vegas hotel, they were richer by six thousand Dollars they won playing Black Jack. They took a bus to Bakersfield , California . There, they rented a small house and bought a used Chevy. The car was extremely noisy and very soon they had their first arguments with the neighborhood. After two months, the situation became quite hostile, and the young couple even received several serious threats. Last Friday morning, the inevitable happened: the waste bin behind the car exploded, the car caught fire and was now full ablaze. Ringo was just on his way to get the newspapers and saw what happened. He ran to the car because there was some money and some important documents in the car that he wanted to save. He caught fire himself; he managed to put it out but was badly burnt on his hands, arms, face and chest. Most of the neighbors were watching the incident through their windows, but nobody came to help; they didn't even call 911. Now Sally and Ringo are looking for a good lawyer because they want to sue the neighbors for material damage and bodily injuries.

Steps in a Trial

Any trial in criminal or civil cases in the United States will be conducted according to the following pattern:

1. Opening Statement by Plaintiff or Prosecutor - Plaintiff's attorney (in civil cases) or the prosecutor (in criminal cases) explains to the trier of fact the evidence to be presented as proof of the allegations ( unproven statements ) in the complaint or indictment.

2. Opening Statement by Defense - Defendant's attorney explains evidence to be presented to deny the allegations made by the plaintiff or prosecutor.

3. Direct Examination by Plaintiff or Prosecutor - Each witness for the plaintiff or prosecution is questioned. Other evidence (e.g., documents, physical evidence) in favor of the plaintiff or prosecution is presented.

4. Cross-Examination by Defense - The defense has the opportunity to question each witness. Questioning is designed to break down the story or to discredit the witness in the eyes of the jury.

5. Motions - If the prosecution's or plaintiff's basic case has not been established from the evidence introduced, the judge can end the case by granting the defendant's motion to dismiss (in civil cases) or by entering a directed verdict (in criminal cases).

6. Direct Examination by Defense - Each defense witness is questioned.

7. Cross-Examination by Plaintiff - Each defense witness is cross-examined.

8. Closing Statement by Plaintiff - Prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney reviews all the evidence presented (noting uncontradicted facts), states how the evidence has satisfied the elements of the charge, and asks for a finding of guilty (in criminal cases) or for the plaintiff (in civil cases).

9. Closing Statement by Defense - Same as closing statement by prosecution/plaintiff. The defense asks for a finding of not guilty (in criminal cases) or for the defendant (in civil cases).

10. Rebuttal Argument - Prosecutor or plaintiff has the right to make additional closing arguments.

11. Jury Instructions - Judge instructs jury as to the law that applies in the case.

12. Verdict - In most states, a unanimous decision is required one way or the other. If the jury cannot reach a unanimous decision, it is said to be a hung jury , and the case may be tried again.

 

click to see a bigger version (140 K)

- top of document - previous document - next document -

Željko Rišner, B.A.