1.
Crime
–
In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a state or other authority. The term crime does not, in criminal law, have any simple and universally accepted definition. The most popular view is that crime is a created by law, in other words, something is a crime if declared as such by the relevant. One proposed definition is that a crime or offence is an act not only to some individual. Such acts are forbidden and punishable by law, the notion that acts such as murder, rape and theft are to be prohibited exists worldwide. What precisely is an offence is defined by criminal law of each country. While many have a catalogue of crimes called the criminal code, the state has the power to severely restrict ones liberty for committing a crime. In modern societies, there are procedures to which investigations and trials must adhere, usually, to be classified as a crime, the act of doing something criminal must – with certain exceptions – be accompanied by the intention to do something criminal. While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime, breaches of private law are not automatically punished by the state, but can be enforced through civil procedure. With institutional and legal machinery at their disposal, agents of the State can compel populations to conform to codes, authorities employ various mechanisms to regulate certain behaviors in general. In addition, authorities provide remedies and sanctions, and collectively these constitute a criminal justice system, Legal sanctions vary widely in their severity, they may include incarceration of temporary character aimed at reforming the convict. Some jurisdictions have penal codes written to inflict permanent harsh punishments, legal mutilation, usually a natural person perpetrates a crime, but legal persons may also commit crimes. Conversely, at least under U. S. law, nonpersons such as animals cannot commit crimes, the sociologist Richard Quinney has written about the relationship between society and crime. When Quinney states crime is a phenomenon he envisages both how individuals conceive crime and how populations perceive it, based on societal norms. The word crime is derived from the Latin root cernō, meaning I decide, originally the Latin word crīmen meant charge or cry of distress. The Ancient Greek word krima, from which the Latin cognate derives, typically referred to a mistake or an offense against the community. In 13th century English crime meant sinfulness, according to etymonline. com and it was probably brought to England as Old French crimne, from Latin crimen. In Latin, crimen could have signified any one of the following, charge, indictment, accusation, crime, fault, the word may derive from the Latin cernere – to decide, to sift
2.
Jurisdiction
–
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a legal body to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility, e. g. Michigan tax law. In federations like the U. S. areas of jurisdiction apply to local, state, colloquially it is used to refer to the geographical area to which such authority applies, e. g. the court has jurisdiction over all of Colorado. The legal term refers only to the authority, not to a geographical area. International laws and treaties provide agreements which nations agree to be bound to, supranational organizations provide mechanisms whereby disputes between nations may be resolved through arbitration or mediation. When a country is recognized as de jure, it is an acknowledgment by the de jure nations that the country has sovereignty. However, it is often at the discretion of each nation whether to co-operate or participate, if a nation does agree to participate in activities of the supranational bodies and accept decisions, the nation is giving up its sovereign authority and thereby allocating power to these bodies. The fact that organizations, courts and tribunals have been created raises the difficult question of how to co-ordinate their activities with those of national courts. But, to invoke the jurisdiction in any case, all the parties have to accept the prospective judgment as binding. This reduces the risk of wasting the Courts time, each such group may form transnational institutions with declared legislative or judicial powers. For example, in Europe, the European Court of Justice has been given jurisdiction as the appellate court to the member states on issues of European law. This jurisdiction is entrenched and its authority could only be denied by a member if that member nation asserts its sovereignty. Hence, in the Netherlands, all treaties and the orders of international organizations are effective without any action being required to convert international into municipal law, in nations adopting this theory, the local courts automatically accept jurisdiction to adjudicate on lawsuits relying on international law principles. Otherwise the courts have a discretion to apply international law where it does not conflict with statute or the common law. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the treaty power authorizes Congress to legislate under the Necessary and this concerns the relationships both between courts in different jurisdictions, and between courts within the same jurisdiction. The usual legal doctrine under which questions of jurisdiction are decided is termed forum non conveniens, to deal with the issue of forum shopping, nations are urged to adopt more positive rules on conflict of laws. In addition, the Lugano Convention binds the European Union and the European Free Trade Association, council Regulation 44/2001 now also applies as between the rest of the EU Member States and Denmark due to an agreement reached between the European Community and Denmark. In some legal areas, at least, the CACA enforcement of judgments is now more straightforward. At a national level, the rules still determine jurisdiction over persons who are not domiciled or habitually resident in the European Union or the Lugano area
3.
Felony
–
The term felony, in some common law countries, means a serious crime. The word originates from English common law, where felonies were originally crimes that involved confiscation of a persons land. Many common law countries have now abolished the distinction and replaced it with other distinctions. A felony is generally considered a crime of high seriousness, while a misdemeanor is not, a person who has committed a felony is a felon, and upon conviction of a felony in a court of law is known as a convicted felon or a convict. In the United States, where the distinction is still widely applied. If punishable by one year or less, it is classified as a misdemeanor. Note that the prison sentence handed out has no effect on this. For example, if a person is sentenced to six months, individual states may differ in this definition, using other categories as seriousness or context. Similar to felonies in some civil law countries are delicts, whereas in others crimes and delicts, larceny or theft above a certain statutorily established value or quantity of goods Vandalism on federal property. Some offenses, though similar in nature, may be felonies or misdemeanors depending on the circumstances, for example, the illegal manufacture, distribution or possession of controlled substances may be a felony, although possession of small amounts may be only a misdemeanor. Additionally, driving while intoxicated in some states may be a misdemeanor if a first offense, in the course of the 20th century, however, American jurisdictions eliminated the distinction among the first three categories. Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez,549 U. S.183, a felony may be punishable with imprisonment for two or more years or death in the case of the most serious felonies, such as murder. Indeed, at law when the British and American legal systems divorced in 1776. Standards for measurement of an offenses seriousness include attempts to quantitatively estimate, in some states, all or most felonies are placed into one of various classes according to their seriousness and their potential punishment upon conviction. The number of classifications and the corresponding crimes vary by state and are determined by the legislature, usually, the legislature also determines the maximum punishment allowable for each felony class, doing so avoids the necessity of defining specific sentences for every possible crime. For example, Virginia classifies most felonies by number, ranging from Class 6 through Class 2 up to Class 1, some felonies remain outside the classification system. New York State classifies felonies by letter, with some divided into sub-classes by Roman numeral, classes range from Class E through Classes D, C, B. Massachusetts classifies felony as an offense that carries any prison time, ohio classifies felonies by degree ranging from first, second, third, fourth, to fifth degree
4.
Criminal offence
–
In ordinary language, a crime is an unlawful act punishable by a state or other authority. The term crime does not, in criminal law, have any simple and universally accepted definition. The most popular view is that crime is a created by law, in other words, something is a crime if declared as such by the relevant. One proposed definition is that a crime or offence is an act not only to some individual. Such acts are forbidden and punishable by law, the notion that acts such as murder, rape and theft are to be prohibited exists worldwide. What precisely is an offence is defined by criminal law of each country. While many have a catalogue of crimes called the criminal code, the state has the power to severely restrict ones liberty for committing a crime. In modern societies, there are procedures to which investigations and trials must adhere, usually, to be classified as a crime, the act of doing something criminal must – with certain exceptions – be accompanied by the intention to do something criminal. While every crime violates the law, not every violation of the law counts as a crime, breaches of private law are not automatically punished by the state, but can be enforced through civil procedure. With institutional and legal machinery at their disposal, agents of the State can compel populations to conform to codes, authorities employ various mechanisms to regulate certain behaviors in general. In addition, authorities provide remedies and sanctions, and collectively these constitute a criminal justice system, Legal sanctions vary widely in their severity, they may include incarceration of temporary character aimed at reforming the convict. Some jurisdictions have penal codes written to inflict permanent harsh punishments, legal mutilation, usually a natural person perpetrates a crime, but legal persons may also commit crimes. Conversely, at least under U. S. law, nonpersons such as animals cannot commit crimes, the sociologist Richard Quinney has written about the relationship between society and crime. When Quinney states crime is a phenomenon he envisages both how individuals conceive crime and how populations perceive it, based on societal norms. The word crime is derived from the Latin root cernō, meaning I decide, originally the Latin word crīmen meant charge or cry of distress. The Ancient Greek word krima, from which the Latin cognate derives, typically referred to a mistake or an offense against the community. In 13th century English crime meant sinfulness, according to etymonline. com and it was probably brought to England as Old French crimne, from Latin crimen. In Latin, crimen could have signified any one of the following, charge, indictment, accusation, crime, fault, the word may derive from the Latin cernere – to decide, to sift
5.
Indictable offence
–
In the United States, a crime of similar severity and rules is called a felony, which also requires an indictment. An either way offence allows the defendant to elect between trial by jury on indictment in the Crown Court and summary trial in a magistrates court. However, the election may be overruled by the court if the facts suggest that the sentencing powers of a magistrates court would be inadequate to reflect the seriousness of the offence. In relation to some indictable offences, for criminal damage. See section 64 of the Criminal Law Act 1977, grand juries were abolished in 1933. Some offences such as murder and rape are considered so serious that they can only be tried on indictment at the Crown Court where the widest range of sentencing powers is available to the judge, in United States, gross negligence can be counted as a indictable offence. The expression indictable-only offence was defined by section 51 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as originally enacted, sections 51 and 52 of, and Schedule 3 to, that Act abolished committal proceedings for such offences and made other provisions in relation to them. When the accused is charged with an indictable offence, he or she will be tried in the Crown Court. The rules are different in England and Wales in respect of those under 18 years of age, see also section 14 of the Criminal Law Act 1977. Similarly in New Zealand, a rape or murder charge will be tried at the High Court, while less serious offences such as theft, however, the District Court can hold both jury and summary trials. For differences between indictable offences and summary offences see summary offences, in United States penal law, other than a felony, court findings of, or an act of gross negligence can be counted as a indictable offence. Federal crime Felony Indictment Summary offence
6.
Common law
–
Common law is the body of law developed from the thirteenth century to the present day, as case law or precedent, by judges, courts, and tribunals. In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is, if a similar dispute has been resolved in the past, the court is usually bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior decision. Resolution of the issue in one case becomes precedent that binds future courts, stare decisis, the principle that cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules so that similar facts will yield similar results, lies at the heart of all common law systems. A common law system is a system that gives great precedential weight to common law. Common law systems originated during the Middle Ages in England, today, one third of the worlds population live in common law jurisdictions or in systems mixed with civil law. The term common law has many connotations, the first three set out here are the most-common usages within the legal community. Other connotations from past centuries are seen, and are sometimes heard in everyday speech. Blacks Law Dictionary, 10th Ed. gives as definition 1,1, the body of law derived from judicial decisions, rather than from statutes or constitutions, CASELAW, STATUTORY LAW. In this connotation, common law distinguishes the authority that promulgated a law. e, examples include most criminal law and procedural law before the 20th century, and even today, most contract law and the law of torts. Interstitial common law decisions that analyze, interpret and determine the fine boundaries. Publication of decisions, and indexing, is essential to the development of common law, while all decisions in common law jurisdictions are precedent, some become leading cases or landmark decisions that are cited especially often. Blacks 10th Ed. definition 2, differentiates common law jurisdictions, by contrast, in civil law jurisdictions, courts lack authority to act if there is no statute. Judicial precedent is given less weight, which means that a judge deciding a given case has more freedom to interpret the text of a statute independently. For example, the Napoleonic code expressly forbade French judges to pronounce general principles of law. As a rule of thumb, common law systems trace their history to England, blacks 10th Ed. definition 4, differentiates common law from equity. This split propagated to many of the colonies, including the United States, for most purposes, most jurisdictions, including the U. S. federal system and most states, have merged the two courts. Additionally, even before the courts were merged, most courts were permitted to apply both law and equity, though under potentially different procedural law. In the United States, determining whether the Seventh Amendments right to a jury trial applies or whether the issue will be decided by a judge, the standard of review and degree of deference given by an appellate tribunal to the decision of the lower tribunal under review
7.
Grand jury
–
Grand jury is a legal body empowered to conduct official proceedings and investigate potential criminal conduct, and determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and compel sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it, Grand jury is separate from the courts, which do not preside over its functioning. Grand juries perform both accusatory and investigatory functions, investigatory functions of grand juries include obtaining and reviewing documents and other evidence, and hearing sworn testimonies of witnesses who appear before it. Grand jurys accusatory function is to determine there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain offence within the venue of district court. Grand jury in the United States is usually composed of 16 to 23 citizens, though in Virginia, in Ireland, they also functioned as local government authorities. In Japan, Law of July 12,1948 created the Kensatsu Shinsakai, Grand jury is so named because traditionally it has greater number of jurors than trial jury, called a petit jury. The function of a jury is to accuse persons who may be guilty of an offense. It is a means for lay citizens, representative of the community and it can also make presentments on crime and maladministration in its area. The traditional number of the jury is 23. No indictment or presentment can be made except by concurrence of at least twelve of the jurors, the grand jury may accuse upon their own knowledge, but it is generally done upon the testimony of witnesses under oath and other evidence heard before them. The proceedings of grand jury are, in the first instance, at the instigation of the government or other prosecutor, the accused has no knowledge nor right to interfere with their proceedings. If the grand jury returns an indictment as a bill, the indictment is said to be founded and party stand indicted. Grand jury only hears evidence on behalf of the prosecution for the finding of an indictment only in the nature of inquiry or accusation, however, they ought to be thoroughly persuaded of the truth of indictment, so far as their evidence goes. The first instance of a jury can be traced back to the Assize of Clarendon in 1166. Henrys chief impact on the development of the English monarchy was to increase the jurisdiction of the courts at the expense of the feudal courts. Itinerant justices on regular circuits were sent out each year to enforce the Kings Peace. To make this system of criminal justice more effective, Henry employed the method of inquest used by William the Conqueror in the Domesday Book. In each shire, a body of important men was sworn to report to the sheriff all crimes committed since the last session of the circuit court, thus originated the more recent grand jury that presents information for an indictment
8.
India
–
India, officially the Republic of India, is a country in South Asia. It is the seventh-largest country by area, the second-most populous country, and it is bounded by the Indian Ocean on the south, the Arabian Sea on the southwest, and the Bay of Bengal on the southeast. It shares land borders with Pakistan to the west, China, Nepal, and Bhutan to the northeast, in the Indian Ocean, India is in the vicinity of Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Indias Andaman and Nicobar Islands share a border with Thailand. The Indian subcontinent was home to the urban Indus Valley Civilisation of the 3rd millennium BCE, in the following millennium, the oldest scriptures associated with Hinduism began to be composed. Social stratification, based on caste, emerged in the first millennium BCE, early political consolidations took place under the Maurya and Gupta empires, the later peninsular Middle Kingdoms influenced cultures as far as southeast Asia. In the medieval era, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam arrived, much of the north fell to the Delhi sultanate, the south was united under the Vijayanagara Empire. The economy expanded in the 17th century in the Mughal empire, in the mid-18th century, the subcontinent came under British East India Company rule, and in the mid-19th under British crown rule. A nationalist movement emerged in the late 19th century, which later, under Mahatma Gandhi, was noted for nonviolent resistance, in 2015, the Indian economy was the worlds seventh largest by nominal GDP and third largest by purchasing power parity. Following market-based economic reforms in 1991, India became one of the major economies and is considered a newly industrialised country. However, it continues to face the challenges of poverty, corruption, malnutrition, a nuclear weapons state and regional power, it has the third largest standing army in the world and ranks sixth in military expenditure among nations. India is a constitutional republic governed under a parliamentary system. It is a pluralistic, multilingual and multi-ethnic society and is home to a diversity of wildlife in a variety of protected habitats. The name India is derived from Indus, which originates from the Old Persian word Hindu, the latter term stems from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, which was the historical local appellation for the Indus River. The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi, which translates as The people of the Indus, the geographical term Bharat, which is recognised by the Constitution of India as an official name for the country, is used by many Indian languages in its variations. Scholars believe it to be named after the Vedic tribe of Bharatas in the second millennium B. C. E and it is also traditionally associated with the rule of the legendary emperor Bharata. Gaṇarājya is the Sanskrit/Hindi term for republic dating back to the ancient times, hindustan is a Persian name for India dating back to the 3rd century B. C. E. It was introduced into India by the Mughals and widely used since then and its meaning varied, referring to a region that encompassed northern India and Pakistan or India in its entirety
9.
Jury
–
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty or not guilty. The old institution of grand juries still exists in places, particularly the United States. The modern criminal court jury arrangement has evolved out of the juries in England. Members were supposed to inform themselves of crimes and then of the details of the crimes and their function was therefore closer to that of a grand jury than that of a jury in a trial. The word jury derives from Anglo-Norman juré, Juries are most common in common law adversarial-system jurisdictions. In the modern system, juries act as triers of fact, a trial without a jury is known as a bench trial. The petit jury hears the evidence in a trial as presented by both the plaintiff and the defendant, after hearing the evidence and often jury instructions from the judge, the group retires for deliberation, to consider a verdict. The majority required for a verdict varies, in some cases it must be unanimous, while in other jurisdictions it may be a majority or supermajority. A jury that is unable to come to a verdict is referred to as a hung jury, the size of the jury varies, in criminal cases involving serious felonies there are usually 12 jurors. In civil cases many trials require fewer than twelve jurors, grand juries carry out this duty by examining evidence presented to them by a prosecutor and issuing indictments, or by investigating alleged crimes and issuing presentments. A grand jury is traditionally larger than and distinguishable from the jury used during a trial. It is not required that a suspect be notified of grand jury proceedings, grand juries can also be used for filing charges in the form of a sealed indictment against unaware suspects who are arrested later by a surprise police visit. In addition to their role in screening criminal prosecutions and assisting in the investigation of crimes, grand juries in California, Florida. A third kind of jury, known as a jury can be convened in some common law jurisdiction in connection with an inquest by a coroner. A coroner is an official, who is charged with determining the circumstances leading to a death in ambiguous or suspicious cases. A coroners jury is generally a body that a coroner can convene on a basis in order to increase public confidence in the coroners finding where there might otherwise be a controversy. Serving on a jury is normally compulsory for individuals who are qualified for jury service, a jury is intended to be an impartial panel capable of reaching a verdict
10.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
–
The Code of Criminal Procedure is the main legislation on procedure for administration of substantive criminal law in India. It was enacted in 1973 and came into force on 1 April 1974, additionally, it also deals with public nuisance, prevention of offences and maintenance of wife, child and parents. At present, the Act contains 484 Sections,2 Schedules and 56 Forms, the Sections are divided into 37 Chapters. In medieval India, subsequent to the conquest by the Muslims, the British rulers passed the Regulating Act of 1773 under which a Supreme Court was established in Calcutta and later on at Madras and in Bombay. The Supreme Court was to apply British procedural law while deciding the cases of the Crown’s subjects, after the Rebellion of 1857, the crown took over the administration in India. The Criminal Procedure Code,1861 was passed by the British parliament, the 1861 code continued after independence and was amended in 1969. It was finally replaced in 1972, cognizable offences are those offences for which a police officer may arrest without court mandated warrant in accordance with the first schedule of the code. For non-cognizable cases the police officer may arrest only after being authorized by a warrant. Non-cognizable offences are, generally, relatively less serious offences than cognizable ones, cognizable Offences reported under section 154 Cr. P. C while Non-Cognizable Offences reported under section 155 Cr. P. C. For Non-Cognizable Offences the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance under section 190 Cr. P. C, under section 156 Cr. P. C the Magistrate is competent to direct the police to register the case, investigate the same and submit the challan/report for cancellation. Under Section 204 of the code, a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence is to issue summons for the attendance of the if the case is a summons case. If the case appears to be a warrant case, he may issue a warrant or summons, Section 2 of the Code defines summons-case as, a case relating to an Offence, and not being a warrant-case. Section 2 of the Code defines warrant-case as, a case relating to an Offence punishable with death, the Criminal Procedure Code is applicable in the whole of India except in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The Parliaments power to legislate in respect of Jammu & Kashmir is curtailed by Article 370 of the Constitution of India. The Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class may pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or of not exceeding ten thousand rupees, or of both. The Courts of Judicial Magistrate of Second Class may pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or of not exceeding five thousand rupees. The State Government has the power to make certain offences bailable or non-bailable in their respective States, Section 260 Clause 2 of the Code lists certain offences which may be summarily tried by any Chief Judicial Magistrate, any Metropolitan Magistrate or any Judicial Magistrate First Class. A First Class Magistrate must first be authorised by the respective High Court to that effect before he may try cases summarily under this Section
11.
England and Wales
–
The devolved National Assembly for Wales was created in 1999 by the Parliament of the United Kingdom under the Government of Wales Act 1998 and provides a degree of self-government in Wales. The powers of the Assembly were expanded by the Government of Wales Act 2006, which allows it to pass its own laws, there is no equivalent body for England, which is directly governed by the Parliament and the government of the United Kingdom. During the Roman occupation of Britain, the area of present-day England and Wales was administered as a single unit, at that time, most of the native inhabitants of Roman Britain spoke Brythonic languages, and were all regarded as Britons, divided into numerous tribes. After the conquest, the Romans administered this region as a single unit and this aimed to replace Welsh criminal law with English law. Welsh law continued to be used for civil cases until the annexation of Wales to England in the 16th century, the Laws in Wales Acts 1535–1542 then consolidated the administration of all the Welsh territories and incorporated them fully into the legal system of the Kingdom of England. Prior to 1746 it was not clear whether a reference to England in legislation included Wales and this specified that in all prior and future laws, references to England would by default include Wales. The Wales and Berwick Act was repealed in 1967, although the definition of England it created is preserved for acts passed prior to its repeal. Since the Acts repeal what was referred to as England is now England and Wales, while references to England, England and Wales are treated as a single unit, for most purposes, because the two form the constitutional successor to the former Kingdom of England. The continuance of Scots law was guaranteed under the 1706 Treaty of Union that led to the Acts of Union 1707, thus, most laws applicable to England also applied to Wales. However, Parliament now passes laws applicable to Wales and not to England, examples are the Welsh Language Acts 1967 and 1993 and the Government of Wales Act 1998. Measures and Acts of the National Assembly for Wales passed since the Government of Wales Act 2006 also apply in Wales, following the Government of Wales Act, effective since May 2007, the National Assembly for Wales can legislate on matters devolved to it. Following a referendum on 3 March 2011, the Welsh Assembly gained direct law-making powers and this was the first time in almost 500 years that Wales had its own powers to legislate. Each piece of Welsh legislation is known as an Act of the Assembly, outside of the legal system the position is mixed. Some organisations combine as England and Wales, others are separate, some religious denominations organise on the basis of England and Wales, most notably the Roman Catholic Church, but also small denominations, e. g. the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. Prior to the disestablishment of the Church in Wales in 1920, the Electoral Commission maintains a register of political parties, organised according to where the party operates. The order of precedence in England and Wales is distinct from those of Northern Ireland and Scotland, the national parks of England and Wales have a distinctive legislative framework and history. Courts of England and Wales Judiciary of England and Wales Cultural relationship between the Welsh and the English Geography of Wales Geography of England British Isles
12.
Crown Prosecution Service
–
The Crown Prosecution Service is the principal public prosecuting agency for conducting criminal prosecutions in England and Wales. It is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, from 1829 onwards, as the police forces were formed, they began to take on the burden of bringing prosecutions against suspected criminals. Police forces continued to be responsible for the bulk of cases, sometimes referring difficult ones to the Director, the Royal Commissions recommendation was not implemented by all police forces however, and so in 1978 another Royal Commission was set up, this time headed by Sir Cyril Philips. It reported in 1981, recommending that a single unified Crown Prosecution Service with responsibility for all public prosecutions in England, in 1997, Sir Iain Glidewell was commissioned by the government to investigate reform of the CPS. The inquiry reported in June 1998, finding that 12% of charges brought by police were discontinued by the CPS, and that there were failures to communicate between the police and CPS. The CPS undertook more than 800,000 prosecutions in 2012–13, the conviction rate was 86 per cent in the magistrates courts and 80 percent in the Crown Courts. The CPS has implemented such as the Core Quality Standards with the intention of maintaining and raising standards. Self-employed barristers are also paid to represent the prosecution in court in more complicated cases, the number of employees prior to the spending review was approximately 9,000. Headquartered in London and York, the CPS manages the organisation, the Director of Public Prosecutions is assisted by the CPS Chief Executive in running the organisation. Most of its casework is dealt with by the thirteen CPS Areas, CPS Direct provides charging advice/authorisation by phone and electronically to police forces at all hours. Most charging decisions by the CPS are now made by CPS Direct, welfare, Rural and Health Division – Benefit fraud, regulation of medicinal products and offences investigated by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The Attorney General oversees the work of the CPS, meeting regularly with the DPP, the Attorney answer for the CPS’s performance and conduct in Parliament. However, the Attorney has no role in the running of the organisation or in deciding whether a suspect should be prosecuted. The CPS is an independent prosecuting authority and government ministers have no influence over its decision making, the only exceptions to this rule are when a case involves matters of national security or the Attorney must personally consent to a prosecution. Due to the Attorney’s limited role in the CPS’s casework, the use of nolle prosequi is now rare, questionable incidents, such as the dropping of the case against John Bodkin Adams for what was believed to be purely political reasons, have not been repeated in modern times. Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate is responsible for inspecting the work of the CPS, the current Chief Inspector of the CPS is Kevin McGinty. The CPS will often provide confidential advice to investigators on the viability of a prosecution in complex or unusual cases and this includes clarifying the intent needed to commit an offence or addressing shortcomings in the available evidence. Unlike in many jurisdictions, the CPS has no power to order investigations or direct investigators to take action
13.
The Crown
–
The Crown is the state in all its aspects within the jurisprudence of the Commonwealth realms and their sub-divisions, although the term is not only a metonym for the State. The Crown is a sole that represents the legal embodiment of executive, legislative. These monarchies are united by the union of their monarch. The concept of the Crown developed first in the Kingdom of England as a separation of the crown and property of the nation state from the person. The concept spread through English and later British colonisation and is now rooted in the lexicon of the other 15 independent realms. In this context it should not be confused with any physical crown, the concept of the Crown took form under the feudal system. Though not used this way in all countries that had this system, in England, all rights, land, for instance, was granted by the Crown to lords in exchange for feudal services and they, in turn, granted the land to lesser lords. One exception to this was common socage—owners of land held as socage held it only to the Crown. The Crown as ultimate owner of all property also owns any property which has become bona vacantia, the monarch is the living embodiment of the Crown and, as such, is regarded as the personification of the state. He office cannot exist without the office-holder, the Crown also represents the legal embodiment of executive, legislative, and judicial governance. While the Crowns legal personality is usually regarded as a sole, it can, at least for some purposes. Historically, the Crown was considered to be indivisible, two judgments—Ex parte Indian Association of Alberta and Ex parte Quark —challenged that view. The Crown in each of the Commonwealth realms is a similar, because both Canada and Australia are federations, there are also crowns in right of each Canadian province and each Australian state. The Succession to the Crown Law 2013 defined the Crown, for the purposes of implementing the Perth Agreement in Jersey law, as the Crown in right of the Bailiwick of Jersey. Legislation in the Isle of Man also defines the Crown in right of the Isle of Man as being separate from the Crown in right of the United Kingdom and this constitutional concept is also worded as the Crown in right of the Bailiwick of Guernsey. The reserve powers of the Crown for each territory are no longer considered to be exercisable on the advice of the UK government, often cases are brought by the Crown according to the complaint of a claimant. The title of the case follows the pattern of R v Y. Thus R v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is R v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, where Miller is Gina Miller, in Scotland, criminal prosecutions are undertaken by the Lord Advocate in the name of the Crown
14.
English law
–
English law is the common law legal system governing England and Wales, comprising criminal law and civil law. English law has no formal codification, the essence of English common law is that it is made by judges sitting in courts applying statute, and legal precedent from previous cases. A decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the highest civil court of the United Kingdom, is binding on every other court. Some rulings are derived from legislation, others, known as law, are based on rulings of previous courts. For example, murder is a common law rather than one established by an Act of Parliament. Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament, murder, for example, the first schedule of the Interpretation Act 1978, defines the following terms, British Islands, England, and United Kingdom. The use of the term British Isles is virtually obsolete in statutes and, for interpretation purposes, England includes a number of specified elements, Wales and Berwick Act 1746, section 3 formally incorporated Wales and Berwick-upon-Tweed into England. But section 4 Welsh Language Act 1967 provided that references to England in future Acts of Parliament should no longer include Wales, but Dicey & Morris say It seems desirable to adhere to Diceys definition for reasons of convenience and especially of brevity. It would be cumbersome to have to add or Wales after England, the adjacent islands of the Isle of Wight and Anglesey are a part of England and Wales by custom, while Harman v Bolt 47 TLR219 expressly confirms that Lundy is a part of England. The adjacent territorial waters by virtue of the Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act 1878, great Britain means England, Wales, Scotland, their adjacent territorial waters and the islands of Orkney and Shetland, the Hebrides and, by virtue of the Island of Rockall Act 1972, Rockall. V Canon Film Sales Ltd.1 WLR1597 and Chloride Industrial Batteries Ltd, V F. & W. Freight Ltd.1 WLR823. British Islands – but not British Isles – means the United Kingdom, the Isle of Man, compare with American convention, which includes of, as in Civil Rights Act of 1964. For example, the Pleading in English Act 1362 was referred to as 36 Edw,15, meaning 36th year of the reign of Edward III, chapter 15, though in the past this was all spelt out, together with the long title. Common law is a term with historical origins in the system of England. This may be a legacy of the Norman conquest of England, an example is the Law Merchant derived from the Pie-Powder Courts, named from a corruption of the French pieds-poudrés implying ad hoc marketplace courts. In 1276, the concept of time immemorial often applied in common law was defined as being any time before 6 July 1189, one of the major challenges in the early centuries was to produce a system that was certain in its operation and predictable in its outcomes. Too many judges were either partial or incompetent, acquiring their positions only by virtue of their rank in society, thus, a standardised procedure slowly emerged, based on a system termed stare decisis which roughly means let the decision stand. The doctrine of precedent which requires similar cases to be adjudicated in a like manner, thus, the ratio decidendi of each case will bind future cases on the same generic set of facts both horizontally and vertically in the court structure
15.
Prosecutor
–
The prosecutor is the chief legal representative of the prosecution in countries with either the common law adversarial system, or the civil law inquisitorial system. The prosecution is the party responsible for presenting the case in a criminal trial against an individual accused of breaking the law. Prosecutors are typically lawyers who possess a law degree, and are recognized as legal professionals by the court in which they intend to represent society and they usually only become involved in a criminal case once a suspect has been identified and charges need to be filed. They are typically employed by an office of the government, with safeguards in place to such an office can successfully pursue the prosecution of government officials. Often, multiple offices exist in a country, especially those countries with federal governments where sovereignty has been bifurcated or devolved in some way. Since prosecutors are backed by the power of the state, they are subject to special professional responsibility rules in addition to those binding all lawyers. For example, in the United States, Rule 3.8 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct requires prosecutors to make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information and that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense. Not all U. S. states adopt the rules, however, U. S. Supreme Court cases. Typical sources of requirements imposed on prosecutors come from appellate court opinions, state or federal court rules. A DPP may be subject to varying degrees of control by the Attorney General, in Australia, the Offices of the Director of Public Prosecutions institute prosecutions for indictable offences on behalf of the Crown. More recent constitutions, such as South Africas, tend to guarantee the independence, in Canada, public prosecutors in most provinces are called Crown Attorney or Crown Counsel. They are generally appointed by the provincial Attorney-General, though Scots law is a mixed system, its civil law jurisdiction indicates its civil law heritage. Here, all prosecutions are carried out by Procurators Fiscal and Advocates Depute on behalf of the Lord Advocate, in very serious cases, a Procurator Fiscal, Advocate Depute or even the Lord Advocate, may take charge of a police investigation. Other remedies are open to a prosecutor in Scotland, including fines and non-court based interventions, such as rehabilitation. All prosecutions are handled within the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, Procurators fiscal will usually refer cases involving minors to Childrens Hearings, which are not courts of law, but a panel of lay members empowered to act in the interests of the child. In the United States, the director of an office may be known by any of several names depending on the jurisdiction. Prosecutors are most often chosen through local elections, and typically hire other attorneys as deputies or assistants to conduct most of the work of the office. United States Attorneys, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, represent the government in federal court
16.
Crown Court
–
The Crown Court of England and Wales is, together with the High Court of Justice and the Court of Appeal, one of the constituent parts of the Senior Courts of England and Wales. It is the court of first instance in criminal cases, however, for some purposes the Crown Court is hierarchically subordinate to the High Court. The Crown Court sits in around 92 locations in England and Wales, the administration of the Crown Court is conducted through HM Courts and Tribunals Service. Previously conducted across six circuits, HM Courts and Tribunals Service is now divided into seven regions, Midlands, North East, North West, South East, South West, London and Wales. The Wales region was identified separately, having regard to the legislative powers of the Welsh Assembly Government. When the Crown Court sits in the City of London it is known as the Central Criminal Court, the average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion was 177 days by the start of 2016. Rather than speaking of a location at which the Crown Court sits, it is practice to refer to any venue as a Crown Court. In 2015 the Crown Court heard 11,348 appeals against conviction, at the conclusion of the hearing the Crown Court has the power to confirm, reverse or vary any part of the decision under appeal. The average waiting time for appeals was 8.8 weeks in 2015, in 2015 the Crown Court dealt with 30,802 cases for sentencing from the magistrates courts. Committals may also arise from breaches of the terms of a Community Rehabilitation Order or a sentence of imprisonment. The court performance target is that cases committed for sentence should be heard within 10 weeks, when the Crown Court is dealing with a matter connected with a trial on indictment, appeal lies to the criminal division of the Court of Appeal and thence to the Supreme Court. In all other cases, appeal from the Crown Court lies by way of case stated to a Divisional Court of the High Court, the judges who normally sit in the Crown Court are High Court judges, Circuit judges and Recorders. Circuit judges also sit in the County Court, Recorders are barristers or solicitors in private practice, who sit part-time as judges. The most serious cases are allocated to High Court judges and Senior Circuit judges, the remainder are dealt with by Circuit judges and Recorders, although Recorders will normally handle less serious work than Circuit judges. The allocation is conducted according to directions given by the Lord Chief Justice of England, the Crown Court was established on 1 January 1972 by the Courts Act 1971, acting on the recommendations of the commission. The quarter sessions were local courts assembled four times a year to dispose of cases which were not serious enough to go before a High Court judge. The Crown Court and a county court may sit in the same building, since the establishment of Her Majestys Courts Service in April 2005 there is an increased sharing of facilities between the Crown Court, county courts and magistrates courts. At the front of the court, on a platform, is a large bench
17.
High Court judge (England and Wales)
–
High Court judges are referred to as puisne judges. High Court Judges wear red and black robes, upon appointment all High Court judges are knighted, or in the case of female judges made Dames Commander of the Order of the British Empire. So, for example, Nigel Bridge became Sir Nigel Bridge, in court, a High Court judge is referred to as My Lord or Your Lordship if male, or as My Lady or Your Ladyship if female. High Court judges use the title in office of Mr Justice for men or, normally, when, however, Dame Alison Russell was appointed in 2014, she took the title Ms Justice Russell. The style of The Honourable is also used during office, for example, Sir Joseph Bloggs would be referred to as The Hon Mr Justice Bloggs Kt. and Dame Jane Bloggs DBE as The Hon Mrs Justice Bloggs DBE, for as long as they continue to hold office. When there is already or has recently been a judge with the same surname as a new appointee. Many judges have done this, such as Mr Justice Christopher Clarke, when referring to a High Court judge in a legal context, the judge is identified by use of the surname, followed by the letter J. For example, Mr Justice Bloggs or Mrs Justice Bloggs would be referred to as Bloggs J, where several judges are listed the double letters JJ are used, for example, Bloggs, Smith and Jones JJ. High Court judges, as with the other Senior Judiciary are appointed by The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister, under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 a new Judicial Appointments Commission has removed the appointment of judges from the political arena. High Court judges, as with other judges, are now appointed on the basis of open competition, High Court judges, as with all judges in England and Wales, hold office during good behaviour, this is laid down in the Bill of Rights 1689. A High Court judge can only be removed by the Queen upon an Address of both Houses of Parliament, formerly, High Court judges could only be appointed from among barristers of at least 10 years standing. Before the qualifications changed, a typical appointee had in the region of twenty to thirty years experience as a lawyer. Only four solicitors had been appointed as puisne judges – Michael Sachs in 1993, Lawrence Collins in 2000, Henry Hodge in 2004, Collins was elevated further to the Court of Appeal in 2007 and became a law lord in 2009. A few distinguished academics have made it on to the High Court bench, including Mrs Justice Hale and, more recently. List of High Court Judges of England and Wales Judicial titles in England and Wales Judiciary of England and Wales
18.
Circuit judge (England and Wales)
–
There are currently over 600 circuit judges throughout England and Wales. The office of judge was created by the Courts Act 1971 and replaced the former offices of Chairman of Quarter Sessions. Circuit judges are styled His or Her Honour Judge X and are referred to as His or Her Honour and they are sometimes referred to as purple judges on account of their purple colour dress robes. Part-time circuit judges are known as Recorders but are also addressed as Your Honour, Circuit judges rank below High Court judges but above District judges. They may be appointed to sit as deputy High Court judges, some are also eligible to sit in the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal, though they are the more senior circuit judges. Until April 1,2005 there were six circuits in England and Wales, namely the Midland, Northern, North Eastern, South Eastern and Western circuits. On that date, following the creation of Her Majestys Courts Service, formerly, circuit judges could only be drawn from barristers and solicitors of at least 10 years standing. When hearing criminal cases, circuit judges wear a robe with lilac trim, bands, a short horsehair wig. For civil cases the tippet is lilac and neither bands nor wigs are worn, when sitting at the Old Bailey, and for some types of High court work, circuit judges wear a black silk gown over a court coat or a waistcoat. On ceremonial occasions they wear violet robes with a lilac trim, in Rumpole and the Reign of Terror by John Mortimer, Horace Rumpole dismisses the idea of being a circuit judge, Circus judge is what I call them. Judicial Roles - Circuit Judge, judiciary. gov. uk
19.
Recorder (judge)
–
Its jurisdiction did not extend to civil suits. It was merged into the Wayne County Circuit Court, the general court in Wayne County. It traces its roots to the Mayors Court in Detroit, formed in 1824 and this municipal court probably owed its name to the fact that from 1827 until 1857, the official name of the City of Detroit was The Mayor, Recorder and Alderman of Detroit. In its 173-year history, it is probable that the Ossian Sweet family murder trials—defended by Clarence Darrow, the trials are memorialized in two official Michigan Historical Markers, Frank Murphy Dr. Ossian Sweet / Home Additionally, there is a Michigan Legal Milestones. Plaque (erected by the State Bar of Michigan in the first floor of the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice in Detroit, Kevin Boyles chronicle, Arc of Justice, A Saga of Race, Civil Rights, and Murder in the Jazz Age was adapted into a play. Mr. Boyle was honored by the Detroit City Council for The Sweet Trials, *The Sweet Trials, Malice Aforethought is a play written by Arthur Beer, based on the trials of Ossian and Henry Sweet, and derived from Kevin Boyles Arc of Justice. The merger of the Recorders court and Wayne County Circuit Court was not without controversy and it was made pursuant to a 1997 state law which also consolidated the states probate courts into a family court, a far less controversial change. A lawsuit brought by Richard Kuhn opposed the merger, but did not prevail, prior to the merger, judges of Recorders Court were elected from Detroit, so unsurprisingly, most of them were African-American. Then Detroit Recorders Court was abolished — or rather, it was merged with Wayne County Circuit Court, the Recorders Court judges became Circuit Court judges, and have to run for re-election in Wayne County as a whole, which is predominantly white. At the time of its merger, and now as reconfigured as a part of the Wayne County Circuit Court, gershwin A. ISBN 0-8050-7933-5, ISBN 978-0-8050-7933-3
20.
Indictments Act 1915
–
The Indictments Act 1915 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that made significant changes to the law relating to indictments. During the nineteenth century several Acts were passed by Parliament to correct this problem, in 1913 Lord Haldane created a committee to draw up a draft bill reforming the law of indictments, which became the Indictments Act 1915. Coming into force on 1 April 1916, the Act established rules on how indictments are to be drafted, an indictment is a document formally accusing an individual of a criminal offence. Indictments have been used in English law from at least 1362, a slight misspelling on the indictment rendered it invalid, and all errors were taken in favour of the prisoner. By the turn of the twentieth century indictments were so complex that some such as Archibald Bodkin had a practice specialising in writing them. Only the Criminal Procedure Act 1851 dealt with indictments directly - the others simply amended the law around it -, nothing else was done to reform the law relating to indictments until the early 20th century. In 1913 Lord Haldane created a committee led by Mr Justice Avory to draft a bill reforming the law of indictments. The draft bill was finished and introduced to Parliament by 1915, despite being the first Act to amend the law relating to indictments in over 50 years, it at no point formally defines what an indictment is. The words by the committee were repealed by section 19 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act 1956. The First Schedule to the Act was repealed by rule 2 of the Indictment Rules 1971, the original format also allows the rules to be changed by the Rules Committee, something removed when the Act was amended by the Criminal Justice Administration Act 1956. The original rules remained in force until 1971, when they were reformed as the Indictment Rules 1971. This was a powerful version of the rules committee established by the Poor Prisoners Defence Act 1903. This section was repealed by the Criminal Justice Administration Act 1956 and the Courts Act 1971, and this section lays out what an indictment is required to contain. It must include a statement of the offence the defendant is being charged with together with such particulars as may be necessary for giving information as to the nature of the charge. The second part of this problems, because prosecution barristers would give the smallest amount of information possible to make the defence counsels job more difficult. This section allowed an indictment for both felonies and misdemeanors at once, but gave the defendant the right to both as if they were felonies and allowed him to challenge the jurors. This was amended by the Criminal Law Act 1967 to remove the right to challenge jurors and this section allows the court to amend an indictment at any point before trial, unless to do so would cause an injustice. It also allows them to postpone a trial for the purpose of amending the indictment and separate felonies and this section allowed the court to award costs to the prosecution for defective or unnecessarily lengthy indictments
21.
High Court of Justiciary
–
The High Court of Justiciary is the supreme criminal court in Scotland. The High Court is both a court of first instance and a court of appeal. As a court of first instance, the High Court sits mainly in Parliament House, or in the former Sheriff Court building, in Edinburgh, or in its own buildings in Glasgow. However it sometimes sits in various towns in Scotland, when it borrows the local Sheriff Court building. As a court of appeal, it only in Edinburgh. The High Court of Justiciary has also sat once outside Scotland, at Zeist in the Netherlands during the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial, the individuals who sit in the High Court often hold a seat simultaneously in Scotlands civil court system. The judges of the High Court are the ones who sit in the Court of Session. The Court of Sessions Lord President is also the High Courts Lord Justice General, the Lord Justice Clerk holds his or her office in both courts. Under the Scottish legal system, the jury need not return a unanimous verdict, the Scottish legal system also permits a verdict of not proven as well as verdicts of guilty or not guilty. The High Court has jurisdiction over all crimes in Scotland unless restricted by statute, in practice, however, the High Court generally deals with crimes, such as murder and rape, in which it has exclusive jurisdiction, as well as other serious crimes. Appeals may be made to the High Court of Justiciary sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal from the courts in criminal cases. An appeal may also be made to the High Court if the High Court itself heard the case at first instance, two judges sit to hear an appeal against sentence, and three judges sit to hear an appeal against conviction. The High Court was founded in 1672 by the Courts Act 1672, the medieval Justiciar took its name from the justices who originally travelled around Scotland hearing cases on circuit or ayre. From 1524, the Justiciar or a deputy was required to have a permanent base in Edinburgh, william Roughead, between 1889 and 1949 attended every murder trial of significance held in the Court
22.
Lord Advocate
–
He or she is the chief public prosecutor for Scotland and all prosecutions on indictment are conducted by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, nominally in the Lord Advocates name. The officeholder is one of the Great Officers of State of Scotland, the current Lord Advocate is The Rt Hon. James Wolffe, QC. The office of Advocate to the monarch is an ancient one, the first recognised Lord Advocate was Sir John Ross of Montgrenan, recorded in 1483 as serving King James III. Her Majestys Government is now advised on Scots law by the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate is not head of the Faculty of Advocates, that position is held by the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates. Until devolution in 1999, all Lord Advocates were, by convention, members of the United Kingdom government, since devolution, the Lord Advocate has been an automatically ex officio member of the Scottish Government. From 1999 until 2007, the Lord Advocate attended the weekly Scottish Cabinet meetings, however, after the 2007 election, the new First Minister Alex Salmond decided that Lord Advocate would no longer attend the Scottish Cabinet, stating he wished to de-politicise the post. Until devolution, all Lord Advocates were, by convention, members of either the House of Commons or the House of Lords to allow them to speak for the Government and those who were not already members of either house received a life peerage on appointment. Appointments as Senators of the College of Justice were formerly made on the nomination of the Lord Advocate, every Lord Advocate between 1842 and 1967 was later appointed to the bench, either on demitting office or at a later date. Many Lord Advocates in fact nominated themselves for appointment as Lord President of the Court of Session or as Lord Justice Clerk, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is headed by the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General for Scotland, and is the public prosecution service in Scotland. It also carries out functions which are equivalent to the coroner in common law jurisdictions. Incorporated within the Crown Office is the Legal Secretariat to the Lord Advocate, the Crown Agent is the principal legal advisor to the Lord Advocate on prosecution matters. He or she acts as Chief Executive for the Department. At trials in the High Court in Edinburgh, they attend as instructing solicitor and they are assisted by other senior legal, managerial and administrative staff. Whilst the Lord Advocate and Solicitor General continue as public prosecutors the principle of separation of powers seems compromised, the potential for a conflict of interest always exists. Resolution of these circumstances would entail an amendment of the contained within the Scotland Act 1998. The judges of Scotlands highest court came to share this view and they noted various ways in which the Lord Advocates roles had caused problems for the judicial system, including the ability to challenge. Virtually any act of a prosecutor has led to a plethora of disputed issues, with delays to the holding of trials and to the hearing. While not specifically favouring any of the three, they noted that the proposal was radical enough to generate considerable controversy
23.
Sheriff court
–
A sheriff court provides local court service in Scotland, with each court serving a sheriff court district within a sheriffdom. Generally, one of the powerful local lords in each county was appointed. The sheriff dispensed the Kings justice in his county in the Sheriff Court, the hereditary sheriff later delegated his judicial functions to a trained lawyer called a sheriff-depute. The Heritable Jurisdictions Act of 1747 abolished the office of hereditary sheriff, at first, only the sheriff of the Lothians and Peebles and the sheriff of Lanarkshire were full-time appointments. Over time, the duties of the depute were entirely assumed by the substitute. The Sheriff Court Act 1870 combined the thirty counties of Scotland into fifteen sheriffdoms, until 1877, the sheriffs-substitutes were appointed by the sheriffs-deputes, after 1877, that right was reserved to the Crown. The civil procedure before the Sheriff Court underwent an overhaul with the enactment of the Sheriff Courts Act 1907. The legal cases which are heard within the Courts are dealt with by a Sheriff, a Sheriff is a Judge who is usually assigned to work in a specific Court, although some work as floating Sheriffs, who may work anywhere in Scotland. There are about a hundred and forty full-time Sheriffs in the various Courts and they are appointed on the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland. The Courts are staffed by servants who are employed by the Scottish Court Service which is a public body. The Scottish Court Service publishes a map, lists of Sheriffs. There are six Sheriffdoms in Scotland, each with a Sheriff Principal, within each sheriffdom are sheriff court districts, each with a court presided over by one or more sheriffs. The most senior civil servant in each Court is the sheriff clerk, the Sheriffdoms are Glasgow and Strathkelvin, Grampian, Highland and Islands, Lothian and Borders, North Strathclyde, South Strathclyde, Dumfries and Galloway, and Tayside Central and Fife. As of 1 February 2015, there are 39 Sheriff Courts in Scotland, some, in rural areas of Scotland, are small due to the sparse population. Courts such as those in the cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow have a number of staff. Glasgow Sheriff Court, for example, is the busiest Court in Europe, Sheriff Courts are above local Justice of the Peace Courts who deal with very minor offences and below the Supreme Courts. The High Court of Justiciary deals with criminal matters, such as Murder. Any final decision of a Sheriff may be appealed, on 1 January 2016 the right of appeal to the Sheriff Principal was abolished and instead an appeal lies to the newly created Sheriff Appeal Court
24.
Capital punishment in the United States
–
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 31 states and the federal government. Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies, there were no executions in the entire country between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U. S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, subsequently, a majority of states passed new death penalty statutes, and the court affirmed the legality of capital punishment in the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia. Since then, more than 1,400 offenders have been executed, the Espy file, compiled by M. Watt Espy and John Ortiz Smykla, lists 15,269 people executed in the United States and its predecessor colonies between 1608 and 1991. From 1930 to 2002, there were 4,661 executions in the U. S. about two-thirds of them in the first 20 years, additionally, the United States Army executed 135 soldiers between 1916 and 1955. The Bill of Rights in 1789 included the Eighth Amendment which prohibited cruel, the Fourteenth Amendment adopted in 1868 also requires a due process of law for deprivation of life by any state. Three states abolished the death penalty for murder during the 19th century, Michigan in 1846, Wisconsin in 1853 and Maine in 1887. Other states which abolished the death penalty for murder before Gregg v. Georgia include, Minnesota in 1911, Vermont in 1964, Iowa and West Virginia in 1965, hawaii abolished the death penalty in 1948 and Alaska in 1957, both before their statehood. Puerto Rico repealed it in 1929 and the District of Columbia in 1981, Arizona and Oregon abolished the death penalty by popular vote in 1916 and 1964 respectively, but both reinstated it, again by popular vote, some years later, Arizona in 1918 and Oregon in 1978. Puerto Rico and Michigan are the only two U. S. jurisdictions to have explicitly prohibited capital punishment in their constitutions, in 1952 and 1964, respectively. Until then save for a few mavericks, no one gave any credence to the possibility of ending the death penalty by judicial interpretation of law according to abolitionist Hugo Bedau. The possibility of challenging the constitutionality of the penalty became progressively more realistic after the Supreme Court of the United States decided Trop v. But in the 1932 case Powell v. Wainwright, in Furman v. Georgia, the U. S. Supreme Court considered a group of consolidated cases. The last pre-Furman execution was that of Luis Monge on June 2,1967, the Supreme Court has never ruled the death penalty to be per se unconstitutional. The five justices in the majority did not produce a common opinion or rationale for their decision, however, Stewart and William O. Douglas worried explicitly about racial discrimination in enforcement of the death penalty. Thurgood Marshall and William J. Brennan Jr. expressed the opinion that the penalty was proscribed absolutely by the Eighth Amendment as cruel. The Furman decision caused all death sentences pending at the time to be reduced to life imprisonment, the next day, columnist Barry Schweid wrote that it was unlikely that the death penalty could exist anymore in the United States. But instead of abandoning capital punishment,37 states enacted new death penalty statutes that attempted to address the concerns of White, some states responded by enacting mandatory death penalty statutes which prescribed a sentence of death for anyone convicted of certain forms of murder
25.
Incorporation of the Bill of Rights
–
Incorporation, in U. S. law, is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U. S. Bill of Rights to the states. Prior to 1925, the Bill of Rights was held only to apply to the federal government, under the incorporation doctrine, most provisions of the Bill of Rights now also apply to the state and local governments. Even years after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank still held that the First, since that time, the Court has steadily incorporated most of the significant provisions of the Bill of Rights. Incorporation applies both procedurally and substantively to the guarantees of the states, rep. John Bingham, the principal framer of the Fourteenth Amendment, advocated that the Fourteenth applied the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights to the States. This is why “fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote, in the 1940s and 1960s the Supreme Court gradually issued a series of decisions incorporating several of the specific rights from the Bill of Rights, so as to be binding upon the States. A dissenting school of thought championed by Justice Hugo Black supported that incorporation of specific rights, Black was for so-called mechanical incorporation, or total incorporation, of Amendments 1 through 8 of the Bill of Rights. Black felt that his formulation eliminated any arbitrariness or caprice in deciding what the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect and this view was again expressed by Black in his concurrence in Duncan v. California. Such a selective incorporation approach followed that of Justice Moody, who wrote in Twining v. If this is so, it is not because those rights are enumerated in the first eight Amendments, frankfurters incrementalist approach did carry the day, but the end result is very nearly what Justice Black advocated, with the exceptions noted below. Some have suggested that the privileges or immunities clause would be a more appropriate textual basis than the due process clause for incorporation of the Bill of Rights. It is often said that the Slaughter-House Cases gutted the privileges or immunities clause, in his dissent to Adamson v. Thus, in Blacks view, the Slaughterhouse Cases should not impede incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states, via the Privileges or Immunities Clause. Some scholars go even further, and argue that the Slaughterhouse Cases affirmatively supported incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states, in dicta, Justice Millers opinion in Slaughterhouse went so far as to acknowledge that the right to peaceably assemble and petition for redress of grievances. Are rights of the citizen guaranteed by the Federal Constitution, although in context Miller may have only been referring to assemblies for petitioning the federal government. In the 2010 landmark case McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court declared the Second Amendment is incorporated through the Due Process Clause, no other justice attempted to question his rationale. The following list enumerates, by amendment and individual clause, the Supreme Court cases that have incorporated the rights contained in the Bill of Rights, guarantee against establishment of religion This provision has been incorporated against the states. See Everson v. Board of Education,330 U. S.1, guarantee of free exercise of religion This provision has been incorporated against the states. See Cantwell v. Connecticut,310 U. S.296, guarantee of freedom of speech This provision has been incorporated against the states. See Gitlow v. New York,268 U. S.652, guarantee of freedom of the press This provision has been incorporated against the states
26.
United States
–
Forty-eight of the fifty states and the federal district are contiguous and located in North America between Canada and Mexico. The state of Alaska is in the northwest corner of North America, bordered by Canada to the east, the state of Hawaii is an archipelago in the mid-Pacific Ocean. The U. S. territories are scattered about the Pacific Ocean, the geography, climate and wildlife of the country are extremely diverse. At 3.8 million square miles and with over 324 million people, the United States is the worlds third- or fourth-largest country by area, third-largest by land area. It is one of the worlds most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations, paleo-Indians migrated from Asia to the North American mainland at least 15,000 years ago. European colonization began in the 16th century, the United States emerged from 13 British colonies along the East Coast. Numerous disputes between Great Britain and the following the Seven Years War led to the American Revolution. On July 4,1776, during the course of the American Revolutionary War, the war ended in 1783 with recognition of the independence of the United States by Great Britain, representing the first successful war of independence against a European power. The current constitution was adopted in 1788, after the Articles of Confederation, the first ten amendments, collectively named the Bill of Rights, were ratified in 1791 and designed to guarantee many fundamental civil liberties. During the second half of the 19th century, the American Civil War led to the end of slavery in the country. By the end of century, the United States extended into the Pacific Ocean. The Spanish–American War and World War I confirmed the status as a global military power. The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 left the United States as the sole superpower. The U. S. is a member of the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Organization of American States. The United States is a developed country, with the worlds largest economy by nominal GDP. It ranks highly in several measures of performance, including average wage, human development, per capita GDP. While the U. S. economy is considered post-industrial, characterized by the dominance of services and knowledge economy, the United States is a prominent political and cultural force internationally, and a leader in scientific research and technological innovations. In 1507, the German cartographer Martin Waldseemüller produced a map on which he named the lands of the Western Hemisphere America after the Italian explorer and cartographer Amerigo Vespucci
27.
Information (formal criminal charge)
–
An information is a formal criminal charge which begins a criminal proceeding in the courts. The information is one of the oldest common law pleadings, and is nearly as old as the better-known indictment, although the information has been abolished in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, it is still used in Canada, the United States and various other common law jurisdictions. In Canada, charges under the Criminal Code are either by summary process, both types of charges begin with an information, except in the rare situation of a direct indictment by the Attorney General. The form of an information is prescribed by the Criminal Code, informations are to be drafted using Form 2 for both indictable matters and summary matters. An information must be sworn by the informant, who is normally a peace officer, the informant then must lay the information before a justice of the peace. The information must contain an allegation that an offence has been committed, the justice of the peace then is required to review the information and determine if process should issue under the Criminal Code for the arrest of the individual. If the matter is a matter, the information is then laid before the court with jurisdiction to hear the charges, usually the Provincial Court. If the preliminary inquiry judge rules that the Crown prosecutor has satisfied this standard, the Crown prosecutor then files an indictment, which is the formal charge to begin the trial, normally in the superior trial court. The indictment is based on the charges originally set out in the information, the Crown is entitled to add additional charges which were supported by the evidence led in the preliminary inquiry, even if those charges were not in the information. However, if the inquiry judge declined to commit the accused on a charge set out in the information. The matter then proceeds to trial on the indictment, the term information is also used for other purposes in the Criminal Code, such as applications to obtain a search warrant. A peace officer who is seeking a warrant must file a sworn information before a justice of the peace. The justice of the peace then reviews the information to obtain, a criminal information was a proceeding in the Queens Bench Division of the High Court brought at the suit of the Crown without a previous indictment. Criminal informations other than those filed ex officio by the Attorney-General were abolished by section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1938, any power to bring proceedings for an offence by criminal information in the High Court was abolished by section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. The last occasion on which there was an ex officio information by a law officer was in 1911, any power to bring proceedings for an offence by criminal information in the High Court was abolished by section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. In that era, convening even larger grand juries just to indict criminals was seen as an unnecessary extravagance, in western U. S. states, district attorneys are authorized by statute to charge criminal suspects by filing informations. United States, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 7 and Rule 9
28.
Murder
–
A murder is the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse, especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought. This state of mind may, depending upon the jurisdiction, distinguish murder from other forms of unlawful homicide, manslaughter is a killing committed in the absence of malice, brought about by reasonable provocation, or diminished capacity. Involuntary manslaughter, where it is recognized, is a killing that lacks all but the most attenuated guilty intent, in most countries, a person convicted of murder generally faces a long-term prison sentence, possibly a life sentence where permitted. In many common law jurisdictions, a convicted of murder will receive a mandatory life sentence. In jurisdictions where capital punishment exists, the penalty may be imposed for such an act, however. The modern English word murder descends from the Proto-Indo-European mrtró which meant to die, the Middle English mordre is a noun from Anglo-Saxon morðor and Old French murdre. Middle English mordre is a verb from Anglo-Saxon myrdrian and the Middle English noun, the elements of common law murder are, Unlawful killing through criminal act or omission of a human by another human with malice aforethought. Killing – At common law life ended with cardiopulmonary arrest – the total, with advances in medical technology courts have adopted irreversible cessation of all brain function as marking the end of life. Сriminal act or omission – Killing can be committed by an act or an omission. of a human – This element presents the issue of life begins. At common law, a fetus was not a human being, life began when the fetus passed through the vagina and took its first breath. By another human – In early common law, suicide was considered murder, the requirement that the person killed be someone other than the perpetrator excluded suicide from the definition of murder. With malice aforethought – Originally malice aforethought carried its everyday meaning – a deliberate, Murder necessarily required that an appreciable time pass between the formation and execution of the intent to kill. The courts broadened the scope of murder by eliminating the requirement of actual premeditation and deliberation as well as true malice, all that was required for malice aforethought to exist is that the perpetrator act with one of the four states of mind that constitutes malice. The four states of mind recognized as constituting malice are, Under state of mind, intent to kill, thus, if the defendant intentionally uses a deadly weapon or instrument against the victim, such use authorizes a permissive inference of intent to kill. In other words, intent follows the bullet, examples of deadly weapons and instruments include but are not limited to guns, knives, deadly toxins or chemicals or gases and even vehicles when intentionally used to harm one or more victims. In Australian jurisdictions, the risk must amount to a foreseen probability of death. Under state of mind, the doctrine, the felony committed must be an inherently dangerous felony, such as burglary, arson, rape. Importantly, the underlying felony cannot be a lesser included offense such as assault, as with most legal terms, the precise definition of murder varies between jurisdictions and is usually codified in some form of legislation
29.
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
–
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. The Supreme Court has applied the protections of this amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Criminal defendants have the right to a speedy trial. In Barker v. Wingo,407 U. S.514, the four factors are, Length of delay. A delay of a year or more from the date on which the speedy trial right attaches was termed presumptively prejudicial, but the Court has never explicitly ruled that any absolute time limit applies. The prosecution may not excessively delay the trial for its own advantage, time and manner in which the defendant has asserted his right. If a defendant agrees to the delay when it works to his own benefit, degree of prejudice to the defendant which the delay has caused. The Court held that, since the trial is the state action which violates the defendants rights. Thus, a reversal or dismissal of a case on speedy trial grounds means that no further prosecution for the alleged offense can take place. In Sheppard v. Maxwell,384 U. S.333, in cases where excess publicity would serve to undermine the defendants right to due process, limitations can be put on public access to the proceedings. According to Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court,478 U. S, the right to a jury has always depended on the nature of the offense with which the defendant is charged. Petty offenses—those punishable by imprisonment for no more than six months—are not covered by the jury requirement, even where multiple petty offenses are concerned, the total time of imprisonment possibly exceeding six months, the right to a jury trial does not exist. Also, in the United States, except for offenses, minors are usually tried in a juvenile court, which lessens the sentence allowed, but forfeits the right to a jury. ”Therefore, it was held that juries had to be composed of twelve persons. When, under the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court extended the right to a trial by jury to defendants in state courts, the Sixth Amendment mandates unanimity in a federal jury trial. Thus, states are not mandated to require jury unanimity, unless the jury has only six members, the Sixth Amendment requires juries to be impartial. Impartiality has been interpreted as requiring individual jurors to be unbiased, at voir dire, each side may question potential jurors to determine any bias, and challenge them if the same is found, the court determines the validity of these challenges for cause. Defendants may not challenge a conviction because a challenge for cause was denied incorrectly if they had the opportunity to use peremptory challenges. In Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, the Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment requires a court in a trial to investigate whether a jurys guilty verdict was based on racial bias. For a guilty verdict to be based on the racial bias of a juror
30.
Complaint
–
Civil court rules in states that have incorporated the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure use the same term for the same pleading. In some jurisdictions, specific types of cases may also be commenced by the filing of a complaint. In the United States, the complaint is often associated with criminal charges presented by the prosecutor without the grand jury process. In most U. S. jurisdictions, the charging instrument presented to, several United States federal courts publish general guidelines for the petitioners and Civil Rights complaint forms. The case caption usually also indicates the court in which the case originates, names of the parties, jurisdiction and venue - this section describes why the case should be heard in the selected court rather than some other court or forum. Parties - identifies plaintiffs and defendants, definitions - optional section which defines some terms used throughout the document. The main purpose of a definition is to achieve clarity without needless repetition, statement of facts - lists facts that brought the case to the court. Cause of Action - a numbered list of allegations, with specific details about application of the governing law to each count. Injury - plaintiff explains to the judge how the actions of the defendant harmed his rights, demand for relief - describes the relief that plaintiff is seeking as a result of the lawsuit. The relief can include a request for declaratory judgment, a request for relief, compensatory and actual damages, punitive damages. After the complaint has been filed with the court, it has to be served to the opposite parties. The court also can issue a summons - an official document which the plaintiff needs to have served together with the complaint. The defendants have limited time to respond, depending on the State or Federal rules, a defendants failure to answer a complaint can result in a default judgment in favor of the petitioner. For example, in United States federal courts, any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a summons and complaint in a civil case. The defendant must submit an answer within 21 days after being served with the summons and complaint, or request a waiver and this allows the judge to make determinations about which deadlines to set for different phases of the case, as it moves through the court system. There are also freely accessible web search engines to assist parties in finding court decisions that can be cited in the complaint as an example or analogy to similar questions of law. Google Scholar is the biggest database of full state and federal courts decisions that can be accessed without charge. These web search engines allow one to select specific state courts to search
31.
Hurtado v. California
–
Hurtado v. California,110 U. S.516, was a case decided on by the United States Supreme Court. The case helped define rules regarding the use of juries in indictments. Joseph Hurtado discovered that his wife, Susie, was having an affair with their friend, Hurtado was arrested for the crime but not indicted by a grand jury. A grand jury shall be drawn and summoned at least once a year in each county, the judge examined the information and determined that Hurtado should be brought to trial. Hurtado was tried, convicted of murder, and sentenced to death, at issue was whether or not the 14th Amendments Due Process Clause extended to the states the 5th Amendments Indictment Clause requiring indictment by grand jury. Does a state criminal proceeding based on a rather than a grand jury indictment violate the 14th Amendments due process clause. Is a grand jury indictment required by the 5th Amendment applicable to state criminal trials via the 14th Amendment and his opinion also concluded that Hurtados due process right was not violated because an information is merely a preliminary proceeding and can result in no final judgment. He further concluded that Hurtado still received a fair trial, however Justice Harlan presented a lone dissent, a learned disquisition on the history and meaning of due process of law that included quotes of many of the great jurists. He cited Edward Coke, who held that in cases, informations are not allowed by that law. Critics contend that by abandoning the grand jury as originally conceived, the grand jury has been criticized, however, as nothing more than a rubber stamp for prosecutors. List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 110
32.
DMOZ
–
DMOZ was a multilingual open-content directory of World Wide Web links. The site and community who maintained it were known as the Open Directory Project. It was owned by AOL but constructed and maintained by a community of volunteer editors, DMOZ used a hierarchical ontology scheme for organizing site listings. Listings on a similar topic were grouped into categories which included smaller categories. It was announced on February 28,2017 that DMOZ would close down on March 14,2017, DMOZ was founded in the United States as Gnuhoo by Rich Skrenta and Bob Truel in 1998 while they were both working as engineers for Sun Microsystems. Skrenta had developed TASS, an ancestor of tin, the popular threaded Usenet newsreader for Unix systems, the original category structure of the Gnuhoo directory was based loosely on the structure of Usenet newsgroups then in existence. The Gnuhoo directory went live on June 5,1998, then objected to the use of Hoo in the name, prompting a proposed name change, to ZURL. Prior to switching to ZURL, NewHoo was acquired by Netscape Communications Corporation in October 1998, Netscape released Open Directory data under the Open Directory License. Netscape was acquired by AOL shortly thereafter and DMOZ was one of the assets included in the acquisition, by the time Netscape assumed stewardship, the Open Directory Project had about 100,000 URLs indexed with contributions from about 4500 editors. On October 5,1999, the number of URLs indexed by DMOZ reached one million, according to an unofficial estimate, the URLs in DMOZ numbered 1.6 million in April 2000, surpassing those in the Yahoo. DMOZ achieved the milestones of indexing two million URLs on August 14,2000, three million listings on November 18,2001 and four million on December 3,2003. As of April,2013 there were 5,169,995 sites listed in over 1,017,500 categories, on October 31,2015, there were 3,996,412 sites listed in 1,026,706 categories. In January 2006, DMOZ began publishing reports to inform the public about the development of the project. The first report covered the year 2005, monthly reports were issued subsequently until September 2006. These reports gave greater insight into the functioning of the directory than the statistics provided on the front page of the directory. The number of listings and categories cited on the front page included Test and Bookmarks categories, there were about 7330 active editors during August 2006. 75,151 editors had contributed to the directory as of March 31,2007, as of April 2013, the number of contributing editors had increased to 97,584. On October 20,2006, DMOZs main server suffered a failure that prevented editors from working on the directory until December 18,2006
33.
Police
–
A police force is a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder. Their powers include the use of force. Law enforcement, however, constitutes part of policing activity. Policing has included an array of activities in different situations, in some societies, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, these developed within the context of maintaining the class system and the protection of private property. Many police forces suffer from police corruption to a greater or lesser degree, the police force is usually a public sector service, meaning they are paid through taxes. Alternative names for police force include constabulary, gendarmerie, police department, police service, crime prevention, protective services, law enforcement agency, members may be referred to as police officers, troopers, sheriffs, constables, rangers, peace officers or civic/civil guards. As police are often interacting with individuals, slang terms are numerous, many slang terms for police officers are decades or centuries old with lost etymology. One of the oldest, cop, has largely lost its slang connotations and this is derived from πόλις, city. Law enforcement in ancient China was carried out by prefects for thousands of years since it developed in both the Chu and Jin kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn period, in Jin, dozens of prefects were spread across the state, each having limited authority and employment period. Under each prefect were subprefects who helped collectively with law enforcement in the area, some prefects were responsible for handling investigations, much like modern police detectives. The concept of the system spread to other cultures such as Korea. In ancient Greece, publicly owned slaves were used by magistrates as police, in Athens, a group of 300 Scythian slaves was used to guard public meetings to keep order and for crowd control, and also assisted with dealing with criminals, handling prisoners, and making arrests. Other duties associated with modern policing, such as investigating crimes, were left to the citizens themselves, in the Roman empire, the army, rather than a dedicated police organization, provided security. Local watchmen were hired by cities to some extra security. Magistrates such as fiscal and quaestors investigated crimes. There was no concept of public prosecution, so victims of crime or their families had to organize and their duties included apprehending thieves and robbers and capturing runaway slaves. The vigiles were supported by the Urban Cohorts who acted as a heavy-duty anti-riot force, in medieval Spain, Santa Hermandades, or holy brotherhoods, peacekeeping associations of armed individuals, were a characteristic of municipal life, especially in Castile. These organizations were intended to be temporary, but became a fixture of Spain
34.
Arrest warrant
–
An arrest warrant is a warrant issued by a judge or magistrate on behalf of the state, which authorizes the arrest and detention of an individual, or the search and seizure of an individuals property. Arrest warrants are issued by a judge or justice of the peace under the Criminal Code, czech courts may issue an arrest warrant when it is not achievable to summon or bring in for questioning a charged person and at the same time there is a reason for detention. Following the arrest, the police must within 24 hours either hand the arrested person over to the nearest court or release the person, the court must immediately interview the arrested person, who has the right to have an attorney present, unless the attorney is not within reach. The court has 24 hours from the moment of receiving the person from the police to either order remand or to release him, reaching the maximum time is always reason for immediate release. Interventions into the freedom of a person are only allowed through the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany under certain conditions, in article 104 the fundamental law determines that a freedom confinement which exceeds a maximum of 48 hours can only be ordered by a Haftrichter. The former is called vorläufige Festnahme, the latter is named Haftbefehl, the procedure for issuing arrest warrants differs in each of the three legal jurisdictions. In England & Wales, arrest warrants can be issued for both suspects and witnesses, in Scotland, a Warrant to Apprehend may be issued if a defendant has failed to appear in court. In Northern Ireland arrest warrants are issued by a magistrate. For the police to make a lawful arrest, the officer must have either probable cause to arrest. Federal statute and most jurisdictions mandate the issuance of an arrest warrant for the arrest of individuals for misdemeanors that were not committed within the view of a police officer. However, as long as police have the probable cause, a warrant is usually not needed to arrest someone suspected of a felony in a public place. In a non-emergency situation, an arrest of an individual in their home requires an arrest warrant. Probable cause will be founded on direct observations by the police officer, or on hearsay information provided by others to the police. ”The individual issuing the arrest warrant need not be a judge or an attorney. While arrest warrants are issued by courts, they may also be issued by one of the chambers of the United States Congress or other legislatures. The arrest warrant must, to comply with the Fourth Amendment, if the arrest warrant does not contain such a description, it is invalid—even if the affidavit submitted by the police or the warrant application contained this requisite information. An example of the usage of word is as follows. Minutes of the Commissioners for detecting and defeating Conspiracies in the State of New York, Albany County Sessions, vol.1, Page 90 In police jargon, these writs are sometimes referred to as a writ of capias, defined as orders to take a person or assets. Capias writs are issued when a suspect fails to appear for a scheduled adjudication, hearing
Definitions from Wiktionary
Data from Wikidata
