1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
daser333 [38]
3 years ago
5

Explain the steps in the arrest and prosecution of someone who is accused of a felony. Your response should be at least 150 word

s.
Law
1 answer:
choli [55]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

take what you need

Explanation:

Arrest

Criminal prosecution typically begins with an arrest by a police officer. A police officer may arrest a person if (1) the officer observes the person committing a crime; (2) the officer has probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed by that person; or (3) the officer makes the arrest under the authority of a valid arrest warrant. After the arrest, the police books the suspect. When the police complete the booking process, they place the suspect in custody. If the suspect commited a minor offense, the policy may issue a citation to the suspect with instructions to appear in court at a later date.

Bail

If a suspect in police custody is granted bail, the suspect may pay the bail amount in exchange for a release. Release on bail is contingent on the suspect's promise to appear at all scheduled court proceedings. Bail may be granted to a suspect immediately after booking or at a later bail review hearing. Alternatively, a suspect may be released on his "own recognizance." A suspect released on his own recognizance need not post bail, but must promise in writing to appear at all scheduled court appearances. Own recognizance release is granted after the court considers the seriousness of the offense, and the suspect's criminal record, threat to the community and ties to family and employment.

Arraignment

The suspect makes his first court appearance at the arraignment. During arraignment, the judge reads the charges filed against the defendant in the complaint and the defendant chooses to plead "guilty," "not guilty" or "no contest" to those charges. The judge will also review the defendant's bail and set dates for future proceedings.

Preliminary Hearing or Grand Jury Proceedings

The government generally brings criminal charges in one of two ways: by a "bill of information" secured by a preliminary hearing or by grand jury indictment. In the federal system, cases must be brought by indictment. States, however, are free to use either process. Both preliminary hearings and grand juries are used to establish the existence of probable cause. If there is no finding of probable cause, a defendant will not be forced to stand trial.

A preliminary hearing, or preliminary examination, is an adversarial proceeding in which counsel questions witnesses and both parties makes arguments. The judge then makes the ultimate finding of probable cause. The grand jury, on the other hand, hears only from the prosecutor. The grand jury may call their own witnesses and request that further investigations be performed. The grand jury then decides whether sufficient evidence has been presented to indict the defendant.

Pre-Trial Motions

Pre-trial motions are brought by both the prosecution and the defense in order to resolve final issues and establish what evidence and testimony will be admissible at trial.

Trial

At trial, the judge or the jury will either find the defendant guilty or not guilty. The prosecution bears the burden of proof in a criminal trial. Thus, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crimes charged. The defendant has a constitutional right to a jury trial in most criminal matters. A jury or judge makes the final determination of guilt or innocence after listening to opening and closing statements, examination and cross-examination of witnesses and jury instructions. If the jury fails to reach a unanimous verdict, the judge may declare a mistrial, and the case will either be dismissed or a new jury will be chosen. If a judge or jury finds the defendant guilty, the court will sentence the defendant.

Sentencing

During the sentencing phase of a criminal case, the court determines the appropriate punishment for the convicted defendant. In determining a suitable sentence, the court will consider a number of factors, including the nature and severity of the crime, the defendant's criminal history, the defendant's personal circumstances and the degree of remorse felt by the defendant.

Appeal

An individual convicted of a crime may ask that his or her case be reviewed by a higher court. If that court finds an error in the case or the sentence imposed, the court may reverse the conviction or find that the case should be re-tried.

You might be interested in
What are the management risks in traffic law enforcement and identifying, managing, evaluating, and monitoring those risks?
Stolb23 [73]

Answer:

Everything in law enforcement is a risk. From the moment you mark on duty until after you mark off city every single action you take is a liability.

The way we manage that (which amounts to tens of millions of incidents and interactions per year) is we try to hire the best officers that are available to us. We have exhaustive hiring processes and extensive training. All of these calls and incidents are highly dynamic and can go from mundane to life threatening in an instant. One single call can save or take a life. That’s why we have a very high level of autonomy. This is not a career field that lends itself to a lot of direct management especially micromanagement. It’s far too complex and far too dynamic to try.

Explanation:

Hope this helps

6 0
3 years ago
Demitri has noticed a friend of his talking to his girlfriend He can be very jealous. One day he decides to teach this friend a
Bingel [31]
No, the charge would be aggravated Assult because it was with a weapon his attorney could try to use temporary insanity but there’s a high chance that wouldn’t succeed
7 0
4 years ago
10 sentences, what are the benefits of talking out problems rather than going to court? What is the difference
kap26 [50]

Answer:

Mainly, the greatest benefit of solving problems outside the judicial system is the cost, since every judicial process necessarily entails a high cost, both in taxes, costs, fees, etc. In addition, the resolution time is much longer, since it involves a whole series of procedural steps that necessarily imply a passage in time, which can be avoided through an alternative resolution of conflicts.

Those means of alternative dispute resolution include, among others, mediation and arbitration. Mediation, on the one hand, involves a series of meetings between the parties in conflict, with the assistance of a specialist, the mediator, who seeks to bring the parties closer together and achieve the resolution of the dispute. On the other hand, arbitration implies that the parties in conflict abide by the solution proposed by an impartial third party, the arbitrator, who will decide according to the rules of law or equity, as appropriate.

8 0
3 years ago
Where would be the best place to obtain your master degree
marusya05 [52]
University of course
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
which criteria must a law meet in order to pass the government’s strict scrutiny test to reasonably discriminate? select all tha
KatRina [158]

The criteria that law must meet in order to pass the government’s strict scrutiny test to reasonably discriminate includes"

  • It must further a compelling government interest
  • It must use the least restrictive means to achieve its purpose.

<h3>What is a strict scrutiny test?</h3>

In law, a strict scrutiny refers to the highest standard of review which a court will use to evaluate the constitutionality of governmental discrimination. In order for a law to pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a "compelling governmental interest" and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest.

This standard is the highest and most of the stringent standard of judicial review and is part of the levels of judicial scrutiny that courts use to determine whether a constitutional right or principle should give way to the government's interest against observance of the principle. However, the lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or intermediate scrutiny and these standards are applied to statutes and government action at all levels of government within the United States.

Read more about strict scrutiny

brainly.com/question/14671704

#SPJ1

7 0
1 year ago
Other questions:
  • If someone gets shot by a cop on accident during a shooting will the cop get in trouble?
    10·1 answer
  • Which South African act or law should be removed?
    8·1 answer
  • Which of these is an example of a land-use law?
    6·1 answer
  • A country cannot produce all of the medical equipment needed to treat its
    7·1 answer
  • What type of gov do these terms describe?
    9·1 answer
  • A is introduced by placing it in the______. Next, it is discussed in_______
    7·1 answer
  • What is the difference between law and theory?
    8·2 answers
  • if a supreme court justice believes that the constitution should be interpreted exactly as written, rather than examined in the
    7·1 answer
  • What is the law that explains how matter on earth is conserved, even if it changes form and composition?.
    11·2 answers
  • How does federalism affect lawmaking in the United States?
    14·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!