Assignment 1 Lasa 2 Your State V Markmark Davis Has Been Cha

Assignment 1 Lasa 2your State V Markmark Davis Has Been Charged Wit

Assignment 1: LASA 2: Your State v. Mark Mark Davis has been charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) for reckless driving, speeding, four counts of felony assault, and one count of involuntary manslaughter as the result of a crash that occurred on a night out with his friends. Mark has been out on bail and pleaded not guilty when he was arraigned. The Judge set a date for Mark's trial and his defense team has been working to collect information about the technology used by the Highway Patrol to reconstruct the crash. District Attorney O'Malley offered Mark a plea bargain, but Mark chose to take his chances at trial.

Mark's attorney, Mr. Chen Long, advised Mark that accepting the plea offer was completely up to Mark, although Mr. Long advised against accepting it because the defense planned to highlight mistakes made by law enforcement during the investigation that could create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. The trial begins and during the voir dire of potential jurors, several individuals are excused because they have previous knowledge of Mark's case from the media. Two individuals stated that they could not be impartial because they had loved ones killed in alcohol related crashes as well.

Eventually, two men and ten women were seated in Mark's trial. District Attorney O'Malley presented the State's case clearly and concisely depicting a night on the town full of heavy drinking, which ultimately resulted in Mark's actions causing the death of one individual and injuring four others. Highway Patrolman Green explained to the jury that he immediately suspected alcohol when he arrived on scene because Mark appeared to be intoxicated when they spoke. Following the Judge ruling that it was admissible and not prejudicial, Sergeant Rodney Monroe, from the Highway Patrol Reconstruction Team presented their reconstruction complete with a high-tech computer animated reenactment of the crash.

During the cross examination, Defense Attorney Long challenged the reconstruction because the Defense Crash Reconstruction Expert had discovered errors in the mathematical calculations for vehicle speed. The jury appeared to have liked the reconstruction very much regardless of the errors highlighted by the defense. Mark was convicted of DWI, four counts of felony assault, and one count of involuntary manslaughter; however, he was acquitted of reckless driving and speeding. The Jury said they could not convict Mark of those offenses because of the mistakes made by law enforcement officers during the investigation. Because Mark pleads not guilty, but was convicted during trial and had two prior DWI offenses, he was sentenced to ten years in the State Prison.

Defense Attorney Long immediately notified the court of an impending appeal that would be filed by the defendant. In a report, using external sources to support your claims, answer the following: Compare and contrast the roles of the Judge, Jury, District Attorney (Prosecutor), and Defense Attorney. What are their primary functions and purposes in the courtroom Workgroup? Discuss the rights of the defendant in your state during the trial phase of the criminal justice process. Discuss the rights of the victims and/or their families in your state during the pre-trial and trial phase of the criminal justice process.

Would it be unusual for the family of a deceased victim to become angered by a slow criminal justice process or one where they are not permitted by law to be given information about the facts or evidence in the case by the District Attorney's Office before the trial? Compare and contrast plea-bargaining versus going to trial. Historically, opponents to plea bargains have claimed that they are used to alleviate heavy workloads of prosecutors (district attorneys). Prosecutors argue that plea-bargaining is a necessary part of the criminal justice process for several reasons. Where is the future of the criminal justice process headed in this regard?

Analyze how the Highway Patrol's computer animated reenactment might have related to the Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) effect in the courtroom. Submission Details: Save the final Microsoft Word document as M5_A1_Lastname_Firstname.doc. By Monday, December 7, 2015 , submit your final paper to the M5: Assignment 1 Dropbox .

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The criminal justice system functions through a collaborative workgroup comprising various roles, each with distinct but interconnected responsibilities. Understanding the roles of the Judge, Jury, District Attorney, and Defense Attorney provides insight into the courtroom's operational dynamics and the pursuit of justice. Additionally, examining the rights of the defendant and victims elucidates the procedural protections and avenues for justice within the system.

The Roles and Functions in the Courtroom Workgroup

The Judge serves as the neutral arbiter responsible for ensuring the fair application of the law during the trial. Their primary functions include overseeing proceedings, ruling on admissibility of evidence, instructing the jury on legal standards, and ensuring courtroom decorum. The Judge's role is pivotal in safeguarding constitutional rights and maintaining judicial integrity (Skarlicki & Folger, 2004).

The Jury's role is to impartially evaluate the evidence presented during the trial and determine the defendant’s guilt or innocence. Jurors act as the fact-finders and must decide based solely on the evidence and instructions provided by the Judge. Their purpose is to represent community values and uphold the procedural fairness by ensuring a verdict reflects the facts (Rosenberg & Rzesnitzki, 2012).

The District Attorney (Prosecutor) prosecutes the case on behalf of the state, seeking to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Their function involves collecting evidence, presenting witnesses, and arguing the case before the jury to uphold public safety and justice. Prosecutors also have an ethical obligation to seek justice rather than merely convict (Small, 2014).

The Defense Attorney advocates for the accused, ensuring their constitutional rights are protected throughout the process. They challenge the prosecution’s evidence, present defenses, and negotiate plea bargains when appropriate. Defense attorneys aim to secure the best possible outcome for their clients while adhering to legal and ethical standards (Kerry, 2010).

Rights of the Defendant and Victims in the State

In the specified state, the defendant's rights during trial include the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to an impartial jury, the right to be informed of charges, and the right to confront witnesses (U.S. Department of Justice, 2020). The defendant also maintains the right to remain silent, present evidence, and be represented by counsel (Feldman, 2018). Notably, the defendant has the right to a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Victims and their families possess rights to participate in the criminal justice process, including the right to be notified of court proceedings, the right to be heard at sentencing, and protection from intimidation or retaliation (Victims' Rights, 2021). In most states, victims can also seek restitution and access to case information after charges are filed, although certain evidence and investigative details may be protected from disclosure to preserve case integrity and suspect rights.

The possibility of victim frustration due to delays or limited access to case information is not uncommon. Victims often seek timely justice and transparency; protracted processes or limited communication can contribute to anger and feelings of neglect. Balancing transparency with the rights of the accused remains a continual challenge within the criminal justice framework (Bohm & Haley, 2013).

Plea Bargaining versus Going to Trial

Plea bargaining involves the defendant's agreement to plead guilty to lesser charges or receive reduced sentencing in exchange for a plea, often resulting in expedited resolution and reduced court backlog (McGough, 2011). Going to trial, however, entails a comprehensive evaluation of evidence, with a jury determining guilt, which can lead to longer cases and higher costs but ensures a full adjudication on the merits.

Opponents of plea bargains argue that they can undermine the pursuit of justice by pressuring defendants to accept plea deals to avoid harsher penalties or lengthy trials. Critics also contend that plea bargains may lead to innocent individuals pleading guilty to escape severe sentences (Costello & Warner, 2012). Prosecutors defend plea bargaining as essential for managing caseloads and providing quicker resolutions, freeing resources for more serious cases (Albonetti, 2014).

The future of plea bargaining appears to be a balancing act: emphasizing transparency and fairness while addressing workload concerns. Innovations such as plea bargaining reforms and alternative dispute resolution methods are increasingly explored to enhance justice and efficiency (Klein, 2018).

The CSI Effect and the Use of Animated Reenactments

The use of high-tech reconstructions like the Highway Patrol's computer animated reenactment can influence jury perception—a phenomenon known as the "CSI effect." This effect involves jurors giving undue credibility to forensic evidence, influenced by television crime dramas that dramatize forensic science (Hastings & Dotson, 2012). Such visual aids may sway jurors by making complex reconstructions more understandable and compelling, even if the scientific accuracy is challenged, as seen in the case where errors in calculations were highlighted.

This phenomenon underscores the importance of judicial instructions clarifying the role and limitations of forensic evidence and reconstructions. These tools, while enhancing understanding, can also lead to misconceptions about the certainty and objectivity of forensic science, potentially impacting verdicts (Nickerson & Grodsky, 2014).

Conclusion

The courtroom workgroup functions through a delicate balance of roles aimed at delivering justice fairly and efficiently. The Judge ensures legal standards are upheld; the Jury embodies community judgment; the District Attorney seeks conviction; and the Defense Attorney protects constitutional rights. Rights of defendants and victims are protected throughout the process, although challenges remain, especially concerning transparency and timely justice. Plea bargaining remains a vital component but raises ethical concerns and future reform debates. Lastly, technological aids like animated reenactments carry both educational potential and risks of the CSI effect, emphasizing the need for judicial vigilance in evidence presentation. As the criminal justice system evolves, integrating technological advancements, procedural reforms, and safeguarding rights will determine its effectiveness and fairness.

References

• Albonetti, C. (2014). The role of plea bargaining in the criminal justice system. Journal of Criminal Justice, 42(5), 442-453.
• Bohm, R. M., & Haley, K. (2013). Law enforcement and the Victims' Rights Movement. In Victimology (pp. 231-258). Routledge.
• Costello, A., & Warner, E. (2012). Plea bargaining and its critics: Concerns and prospects. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 23(4), 389-408.
• Feldman, D. (2018). Constitutional rights of the accused. Oxford University Press.
• Hastings, C., & Dotson, K. (2012). The CSI effect: How forensic evidence influences juror decision-making. Law and Human Behavior, 36(6), 516–532.
• Klein, J. (2018). Future trends in plea bargaining reform. Justice Quarterly, 35(2), 195-217.
• Kerry, J. (2010). The defense attorney's role in criminal justice. Criminal Law Review, 8, 104-110.
• McGough, S. (2011). Plea bargaining and judicial legitimacy. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(3), 283-300.
• Nickerson, R. S., & Grodsky, A. (2014). Understanding the CSI effect: Jury misconceptions and forensics. Forensic Science Review, 26(1), 45-63.
• Rosenberg, T., & Rzesnitzki, R. (2012). The jury system: A comprehensive analysis. Law & Society Review, 46(4), 762-787.
• Small, H. (2014). Prosecutorial Ethics and Responsibilities. Journal of Law & Ethics, 22(1), 109-130.
• U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Rights of the accused: Overview of constitutional protections. DOJ Publications.
• Victims' Rights. (2021). State statutes and victim advocacy resources. Victims Support Organization.