100 likes | 341 Views
United States Supreme Court 9 Justices. Court of Appeals 12 – 3 Judge Panels. District Courts 94. PA Supreme Court 7 Justices. Superior Court 15 Judges. Commonwealth Court 9 Judges. Court of Common Pleas 450 Judges. Minor Courts 533 Judges. Federal Crimes.
E N D
United States Supreme Court 9 Justices Court of Appeals 12 – 3 Judge Panels District Courts 94 PA Supreme Court 7 Justices Superior Court 15 Judges Commonwealth Court 9 Judges Court of Common Pleas 450 Judges Minor Courts 533 Judges
Create a table like the one below. Classify the list of examples on the next slide in the proper court.
Kickbacks • Racketeering • Sue school for student drug testing • Assault • Insurance Fraud • One parent appeals a minor court’s custody decision • Recruiting criminal gang members • Extortion • Hears appeal from Court of Common Pleas concerning lack of Miranda Rights of a convicted man • Affirms the decision of the Court of Common Pleas because the man’s 5th amendment rights were not violated • Reverses the decision of the Superior Court and Court of Common Pleas because the man’s 5th amendment rights were violated
Hears an appeal on the ruling of a case concerning insurance fraud • Can affirm, reverse, or remand a case from the Court of Appeals on insurance fraud
Read the story and draw the diagram of the progression of courts used. • Story A: John Doe was arrested and mirandized for armed robbery of 5 banks in 5 states, and extortion of two casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey. He was tried and found guilty. He felt that his 6th amendment rights were violated because he was not provided with a lawyer. He appealed his case, but the original decision affirmed. He appealed again to a higher court, but records showed that he had been offered an attorney, which he refused. The higher court also affirmed the first decision.
Story B: After a long custody battle between Jane and John Doe over their prize dog Stella was settled in court, John was awarded custody. Jane, distraught over the loss of money that she had invested the previous ten years in the pup, kidnapped her five days after the court ruling. She was found, arrested, tried, and found guilty. She appealed the court’s decision, stating that her Miranda Rights had not been read to her. The ruling was reversed, after documents and police testimony revealed that she, in fact, had not been read her rights, and all testimony collected from her by police was inadmissible in court, and could not be used against her.