The Courts and Courtroom Actors

There are different actors in the courtroom, and each has a specific role in how a trial or session will progress. There are also differences between the federal and state courts that are important to understand. In this assignment, you will outline details about the actors in the courtroom and federal and state courts. You will gain an understanding of the courts that will prepare you to participate in the courtroom process.

 

Imagine you are a court administrator for the local superior court. You have been asked to speak to a high school civics class. Specifically, the teacher would like you to provide a general overview of federal and state courts and discuss the primary actors in each court system.

 

Create an 8- to 10-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation in which you:

Identify actors in the courtroom.
Who are the actors in federal courts and state courts? (Include actors the two courts have incommon and any actors who are different.)
What are their responsibilities?
Why is it important for these responsibilities to be fulfilled adequately? (Consider the effect of overzealousness compared to the effect of underperformance.)
Identify what is different between these actors in federal courts from the same actors in the state courts.
Judges
Defense attorneys
Prosecutors
Juries
Contrast federal and state (your state or the state you’re from) courts (consider creating a diagram/chart/table).
Structure
Jurisdiction
Roles of each court
Case types

 

 

 

Sample Solution

The Courts and Courtroom Actors

Key figures in a courtroom trial are the judge, a court reporter (in superior court), a clerk, and a bailiff. Other central people are the attorneys, the plaintiff, the defendant, witnesses, court interpreters, and jurors. At the beginning of a federal criminal case, the principle actors are the U.S. attorney (the prosecutor) and the grand jury. The U.S. attorney represents the United States in most court proceedings, including all criminal prosecutions. Perhaps the most distinguishing and most frequently cited difference between state and federal courts is how punishment is levied. Individuals convicted of crimes by state or local prosecutors can face a range of penalties, as well as incarceration in a state prison. While there are some federal crimes which may only result in federal probation and/or fines, most individuals convicted in federal court are subjected to federal sentencing guidelines.

 

 

 

exposition on facebook friendshipThe Internet these days assumes a critical job in individuals’ professions, connections, and different circles of life. Since it began to pick up ubiquity in the mid 1990s, it has transformed into a worldwide system, associating any person who can manage the cost of having a PC to the remainder of the world.

Bit by bit, administrations permitting to make new companions and to keep in contact with previously obtained companions began to show up, and today billions of individuals utilize different interpersonal organizations, of which the biggest is Facebook. These informal organizations despite everything stay a discussed wonder, just as the outcomes they lead to and the manner in which they have changed social orders. Furthermore, maybe, one of the weirdest (at any rate to me) marvels associated with them is Facebook companionship.

A Facebook kinship is adding an individual to your rundown of companions. As I would like to think, this is a sensible activity with individuals whom you care about, or whom you keep up a relationship with. Genuine companions, guardians, your beloved(s), partners with whom you spend time with after work, individuals whom you have warmed up to while voyaging, etc, should be available in any Facebook companion list.

Be that as it may, in reality, individuals include new individuals whom they have never met or known. Regardless of whether they have never traded words, they despite everything keep each other in their companion records. Or on the other hand another model is when associates who work in a similar office include one another, yet don’t speak with one another in Facebook or even in the workplace. Or on the other hand when irregular individuals who have (under certain conditions) conveyed for a few minutes, at that point add each other to their companion records. At times individuals even add different clients to their companion records for a demonstration of amount—maybe, it is intended to show how friendly they are. These, just as numerous other comparable cases, I don’t comprehend, and this is one reason why I have stopped utilizing informal organizations about a year back.

Companion records can be a wellspring of different aggravations. For instance, individuals some of the time are reluctant to erase such arbitrary “companions” from their rundowns, due to expecting an issues associated with this demonstration—managing someone’s feelings, for instance, or clarifying their reasons. Or maybe regularly, erasing individuals from Facebook companions should show the pace of dissatisfaction or outrage caused to a client by the erased individuals. Simultaneously, genuine correspondence frequently proceeds as though nothing spe

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.