1) The Appellate Process, write a 8-10 sentence detailed paragraph. Cite your sources.
As an introduction to appellate courts, I want to just give you a little information on what an appellate court looks like and how it works. There is no jury in an appellate court, only judges. An appellate hearing is front of a panel of judges. The panel may consist of 3 judges, 7 judges, or 9 (the US Supreme Court has 9 judges). An attorney for each side gives an argument (generally between 15 – 30 minutes, depending on the case). The judges may ask questions during the arguments of the lawyers or after the arguments. The lawyers do not call witnesses, nor do they submit evidence. They simply argue whether the law was followed correctly by the trial court. The appellate court has the transcripts of the lower court, the evidence submitted to the trial court, and the arguments submitted in writing to the appellate court. Once they hear the oral arguments, they then make their decision.
After you watch the video for this week, let’s talk about the following questions/issues.
What is the purpose of appellate courts? How is their job different from that of a trial court?
Give an example of a fact that might be proven in a case, and a law that might be at question in a case. (Don’t use the DUI example in the video).
Then do some research and find a criminal case that was appealed anywhere in the US and tell us the result of the appeal. Was the conviction upheld by the appellate court or was it overturned (thus sending the case back to trial court to a re-trial).
2) write a response to the students paragraph 5 sentences min. Write how you agree with their ideas and add more to it. Do not just compliment the student on their work. Add details of how you agree.
Student response: As it explained in the video the appellate courts have the power and specialist to survey the choices of the trial court, and any judgment won in the trial court. There are three major differences between trial courts and appellate courts. In appellate courts, the lawyers just contend lawful and approach issues under the watchful eye of the judge or a gathering of judges. In the trial courts, the lawyers display confirm and lawful contentions to induce the jury in a jury trial or the judge in a bench trial.The second major difference between the two courts is the judges. In trial courts, there is one judge in the court. In Appeals cases, there are five gatherings of three judges, and in the Supreme Court, there is one gathering of five judges.The last significant contrast between the trial courts and the appellate courts is the part of the jury. A jury is a gathering of citizens who listen in to the realities and settle on choices about the case. A jury is now and then utilized as a part of trial courts to help choose the case.
Example of case EWING v. CALIFORNIA, (2003) . While on parole, petitioner Ewing was convicted of felony grand theft for stealing three golf clubs, worth $399 apiece. As required by the three strikes law, the prosecutor formally alleged, and the trial court found, that Ewing had been convicted previously of four serious or violent felonies. In sentencing him to 25 years to life, the court refused to exercise its discretion to reduce the conviction to a misdemeanor–under a state law that permits certain offenses, known as “wobblers,” to be classified as either misdemeanors or felonies–or to dismiss the allegations of some or all of his prior relevant convictions. The State Court of Appeal affirmed.