The Roles of Defense Attorneys and Juries in the U.S. Court System
Introduction
It is important to note that the United States legal system is complex and structured to ensure that it is fair, effective, and efficient. The given analysis will define and explain American courts’ critical components and processes. In addition, it will comprehensively address who defense attorneys and juries are and how they operate. Therefore, the US court system is dual, in which defense attorneys protect the defendants’ rights, and juries ensure that cases are appropriately assessed.
The Role of Defense Attorneys and Juries in the United States Legal System
First, defense attorneys are individual lawyers or law firms specializing in defending people accused of a crime. Defense attorneys are needed since not everyone has the competencies, knowledge, and skills to protect their rights in court adequately. They usually engage in activities such as case investigation, evidence review, law research, and arguing on behalf of the defendant (Scheb and Sharma 86).
Secondly, one should be aware that the United States is a federation, which means it has federal and state levels. This applies to the US court system, where there are federal and state courts. The former can be divided into three sub-levels, which include the final level of appeal, such as the Supreme Court; the first level of appeal, such as the circuit court; and the lower trial court (Scheb and Sharma 21). The equivalent pattern exists in state courts involving state supreme courts, intermediate courts, and trial courts, such as municipal courts. Thus, the US court system is layered in its structure on both federal and state levels.
Thirdly, grand and petit juries are two categories in the United States legal system. They are chosen by asking questions and interviewing, called voir dire, which aims to select just and unbiased people (Scheb and Sharma 247). Depending on the jurisdiction, there are around 16 to 23 grand jury members, whereas the number is lower for petit juries, which is close to 12 (Scheb and Sharma 268). The latter is known as the trial jury, which provides their final verdict on whether or not the defendant is found responsible for their crimes in criminal and civil cases. In the case of grand juries, they do not determine innocence or guilt but rather decide if the evidence for prosecution is adequate.
Fourthly, when it comes to plea bargaining, refers to the agreement between a prosecutor and a defense attorney. It entails the former making charge concessions for the defendant pleading guilty to a specific charge (Scheb and Sharma 135). As a result, the trial process is hastened, which allows the defendant to end this uncertain process quickly. In addition, the victims gain a win, but it might not be satisfactory due to potential charge reduction. Lastly, the burden of proof is a legal concept or framework, which means it is up to a prosecutor to prove and provide evidence that the defendant is guilty of a charge.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the court system in America is dual, consisting of federal and state courts. Defense attorneys represent and protect the defendants’ rights, and they might engage in agreements with prosecutors, such as plea bargaining. The burden of proof always lies on those accusing a person of a crime rather than the defendant. Grand and petit juries play differential roles in making the legal system efficient and effective.
Work Cited
Scheb, John M., and Hermant Sharma. An Introduction to the American Legal System. 5th ed., Aspen Publishing, 2020.