Federal Court Basics
Part 011
 

What Is the Purpose of the Trial?

Role of judge and jury. If the parties in a civil case can't agree on h to settle the case on their own, or if a defendant in a criminal case plea, not guilty, the court will decide the dispute through a trial. In a criminal case, the purpose of a trial is to find out whether the defendant failed fulfill a legal duty to the plaintiff. In a criminal case, the purpose o trial is to determine whether the defendant committed the crime charged.

If the parties choose to have a jury trial, determining the facts is i task of the petit jury. If they decide not to have a jury and to leave t fact‑finding to the judge, the trial is called a bench trial. In either ki of trial, the judge makes sure the correct legal standards are followed, there is a jury, the judge tells the jury what the law governing the case For example, in a robbery case in which an unloaded gun was used, t judge would tell the jury that using an unloaded gun to rob a store legally the same as using a gun that is loaded. But the jury would ha to decide whether the defendant on trial was actually the person w. committed the robbery and used the gun.

Adversary process. Courts use the adversary process to help them reach a decision. Through this process, each side in a dispute presents its most persuasive arguments to the fact finder (judge or jury) and emphasizes the facts that support its case. Each side also draws attention to any flaws in its opponent's arguments. The fact finder then decides the case. American judicial tradition holds that the truth will be reached mc effectively through this adversary process.

The evidence the jury (or judge, in a bench trial) relies on to decide the case consists of two types: (1) physical evidence, such as discernments photographs, and objects, and (2) the testimony of witnesses who
are questioned by the lawyers. There are federal rules of evidence and the rules of evidence enavted by the various states.

Standards of proof. The courts, through their decisions, and Congress, through statutes, have established standards by which facts must be proven in criminal and civil cases. In criminal cases (federal or state), the defendant may be convicted only if the jury (or judge, in a bench trial) believes that the government has proved the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." Remember that for the grand jury to issue an indictment, it only has to believe that the defendant probably commit­ted the crime. But for the petit jury to find the defendant guilty, it must be certain that the defendant committed the crime; it can have no "rea­sonable doubt" about it. A jury verdict must be unanimous, meaning that all jurors must vote either "guilty' or "not guilty." If the jurors cannot agree, the judge declares a mistrial, and the prosecutor must then decide whether to ask the court to dismiss the case or have it presented to another jury.

In civil cases, in order to decide for the plaintiff, the jury must deter­mine by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the defendant failed to perform a legal duty and violated the plaintiffs rights. A preponder­ance of the evidence means that more of the evidence favors the plaintiff's position than favors the defendant's.

Admittedly, these standards aren't precise, but when the judge ex­plains them to the jury, they help guide the jury in its task of deciding the case.

Much of the way our court system works can be traced back to developments in England in the seventeenth century, at the time when America was a group of English colonies. During that century, England abolished the hated Court of the Star Chamber, a court that was tied closely to the prosecutor and that brought enemies of the king to trial for treason and other serious crimes, invariably finding them guilty. A century of criminal justice reforms in England resulted in a number of protections for individuals accused of crimes and adoption of the idea that courts should make their judgments free of pressure from prosecutors. American courts inherited these traditions from England and incorporated them into our judicial system.

Federal Court Basics-Table of Contents
Part 003-Map: Geographical boundaries of U.S. Courts of Appeals and U.S. District Courts-pdf

California State Bar Court Reports | Master Table of Contents | Spanish Dictionaries |Check Your Credit Score
Thomas - Legislative Information on the Internet | Entertainment  | UN Treaty Reference Guide
Directory of Medical Dictionaries  | California Injury (Torts) Law | Yaazoo!
Florida Fun | Law Dictionary | White House | US Government | White House | US Government    
eWorld Guide | US Courts| Law Students-US | State Courts | California Criminal Law | California Appeals 
 California Contracts Law.Com | California Injury (Torts) Law | iBusiness Center | California Writs
Yaazoo! | Abogados Latinos   | Agogados De Accidentes  | United States History | Spanish
California State Rules of Court | Injury Attorneys | California Legal Forms | Federal Rules of Evidence