POSC 130g 1st Edition Lecture 7Current LectureRequirement that the police gives Miranda warnings: negligible effectEven though the police were required to give the warnings, they did it half hazardly.Incoed crimes: conspiracy, to be convicted one must have the intent and must commit the crimeSome crimes are the intent of just planning itCourt SystemTrial Courts: only hear disputes if there is a legal category, no right without a remedyCourts want to be fair and protect due process; tension between the courtsTrial courts don’t write any decision, don’t write reasons for ruling, observing or reading transcripts if case is taken on appeal, liken to elaborate chess gamesIt is a legal battle and in criminal cases, many of them are handled through plea bargaining, criminal courts are for prosecution for the poor usually. Plea bargaining remains controversial, there is pressure on defendants to accept a pleaAppellate courtsOne of the most distinct features of the American legal system is the dual court system, state and federal courts. It is a consequence of the 1789 Judiciary Act which set up the federal courts to operate alongside the state courts. Section 25 of the Judiciary Act gave the US Supreme Court the authority to review State court decisions if they were based on federal law claim; based on treaty or federal statueThe state courts are bound by US Supreme Court decisionsState courts have attained some autonomy, they are the final arbitrators of the state law, based on own provisions. The federal trial courts which are called district courts are more standardFederal courts: criminal matters involving violation of federal lawFederal judges have tenure- will be there for life unless misconductState court judges have different rules, sometimes elected, sometimes appointed; many different ways state court judges are selectedThe US Supreme Court used to have to take cases on appeal, but now do not do mandatory appeal, they only do cases at their digressionDual court systems means at least 51 judicial systems; rules can vary in different statesForum shopping: lawyer will figure out which place they will be most likely to prevailCannot summarize what the courts will ruleUS Supreme Court is the only court that has binding authority, the California courts don’t have binding authority of Vermont Supreme CourtState courts are entirely independent of each otherFederal court: supposedly, judges are better because they are elected, shorter time to go to trialPolitical orientation of judges: lawyers take into account when deciding what court to go intoSometimes there are cases that involve state and federal claim: if plaintiff files a suit in federal court and the matter is decided (recjediceta)- this prevents a plaintiff from going to another courtcollateral estapple- being stopped from making a claim in one court if facts have already been decided in another court. If a federal court hears a case that has a state and federal claim, that is called pendent jurisdiction- person can’t go to state after federalThe person can go to state court and be heard both matters of federal and stateIf the law suit is against the state, there cannot be any suits against the federal state or wards of the states; state officials sometimes have immunity which prevents them from being sued. Advantage of going to state court: final arbitral of matters of state lawIndependent state groundsFederal constitution is the floor, the minimum rights that all states must protectState constitution is the ceiling, can provide more rights than are available under the ConstitutionIf the state Supreme Court makes a decision based on state and US Constitution, since the state is the authority of state law, the US Supreme Court cannot take the case even if the Supreme Court thinks it misinterpreted the US ConstitutionPrunyard vs. Robbins1980free speech rights Zionism, throw out of a marketwent to court, but court wouldn’t issue an injunctionCalifornia Supreme Court held that the shopping center was allowed to have activity, rejected that this violated the shopping owners of their 5th Amendment rights, right against property takenCase went to US Supreme Court but said the federal law was confusing, but probably under federal law, the students would loseHowever sine it was based on California law, the students had the free speech right to circulate petition at shopping center.The Supreme Court would not review the court, recognized independent state grounds and left it to the California Supreme CourtEven though the US didn’t agree under federal law, US Supreme Court can’t interfere by how California Supreme Court interprets their constitutionWhat is the function of the jury: designed to have a check on government institutions, limit political tyranny, provided for the public to check unjust decision making by courts, fundamentalconstitutional right- juries only hear about 8% of criminal cases because of plea bargaining, represent possibility of descent even if the legal system is united- juries can never the less disagree. In terms of the function of the jury, if the jury acquits someone, the judge can’t do anything about thatIf the jury convicts, the judge can reverse the decision In a civil case, sometimes judge will take case away from the jury and sometimes it is done through directed verdict- that is before the jury has decidedAlso something called judgment notwithstanding the verdict, jury has decided and judge will setit asidePreference for the second procedure because if the judge reversed decision, we know what the jury decided.Judge can reduce the size of a damage award or can increase it. Juries1. Function: finding the facts versus applying the lawIndependence of jury: doesn’t have to give reason, just has to say yes or no1. Trial of William Penn (1670) a. took place in the Old Bailey, criminal court is London. Founder of colony of Pennsylvania, William Penn was the defendant being charged with unlawful assembly. The jury was instructed that they wouldn’t be dismissed until render proper verdict. The judge didn’t accept the jury’s decision, wanted a decision that the judge liked. Government forced to accept jury verdict not guilty but the defendants had to spend time in prison. This is a case that helped decide indepdence of the jury that jury can decide what they want not what the judge wants2. Compare to Throckmorten case (1554) a. Juries were fined and stripped of lands because Jury found