1. Pre-Trial Activities & Trial Chapter #10

2. pre-trial activities Arrest / preliminary arraignment / preliminary hearing / formal hearing

3. arrest • Actual arrest • Constructive arrest

4. preliminary arraignment • Notification of charges • Miranda • Bail • 6 hour rule

5. bail • Full amount • 10% • ROR • Conditional release • Signature bond • Pre-trial services • Sets rules of bail • P. 377

6. Danger laws Limit right to bail for violent offenders

7. Private citizens Generally 23 Simple majority Secret ballot Find a bill of indictment Investigative grand juries Primi facie District magistrate 3-10 days (no bail) 30 days (bail) Outcomes 1. refer for trial Dismiss charges Resolve case Grand jury /Preliminary hearing

8. formal arraignment • Notice of attorney • Explanation of charges • Motions • Pleas • Guilty • Nolo contendre

9. guilty plea • Allocution • Sixth Amendment rights given up: • 1. self-incrimination • 2. trial by jury • confrontation

10. criminal trials Determine: guilty / not guilty / hung jury Innocence: presumption

11. criminal trials Highly formalized Adversarial: prosecution & defense argue their cases before judge & jury

12. levels of guilt • Factual guilt: defendant actually responsible for the crime (may be found not guilty) • Legal guilt: defendant found guilty as charged

13. 1. voir dire 2. judges opening statement 3. prosecutor & defense opening 4. prosecution case 5. defense case 6. rebuttal 7. prosecutor & Defense attorney’s closing 8. judge’s jury instruction 9. jury deliberations 10. verdict 11. post-trial motions Motions - anytime states of a trial

14. speedy trial - pa 180 days – incarceration 365 - bail

15. Strunk v. U.S. (’73) – denial of a speedy trial should result in dismissal U.S. v Taylor (’88) – delay resulting from defendant doesn’t count toward 180 days Doggett v U.S. (‘92) – delay caused by gov’t negligence creates prejudice & could become intolerable Federal Speedy Trial Act (’74) – 180 days speedy trial cases - USSC

16. Voir dire – to speak the truth Impartial Jury of peers Guaranteed by sixth amendment Juror challenges Challenge to the array: jury pool not representative of community – motion prior to voir dire Challenge for cause: claim that a specific juror can’t be impartial / unlimited in number Challenge for judge: judges dismisses jurors for reasons of work etc Peremptory challenge: limited in number / jurors attorneys don’t want / 5 per misdemeanor / 7 per felony / 20 per capital case jury selection process

17. sequestered jury Isolated from public during trial Move trial Import jury

18. Batson v Kentucky ‘90 use of peremptory challenges for purposeful discrimination constitutes a Sixth Amendment violation

19. opening statements Prosecution first Defense second Outline respective cases

20. Types Direct – testimony of witnesses – what they sense Circumstantial – must make an inference to draw conclusion Real (physical) – tangible exhibits Evidence – anything useful to decide facts of case Relevancy – must directly or indirectly relate to case Probative value – the importance of evidence but does not rise to level of prejudicial evidence

21. testimony of witnesses • Oral evidence presented by lay & expert witnesses • Competency of witnesses • Defendant only can take the 5th • Under oath – perjury • Direct & cross examination • Child witnesses – PA – no videotape

22. hearsay Anything not based on witnesses’ personal knowledge “second-hand evidence” Exceptions: excited utterances & dying declarations

23. closing arguments Defense first Prosecution second Summary of the case from their perspective

24. judge’s instructions (charge) • Explanation of the law pertaining to case • Selection of foreman • Deliberation rules • Verdict rules

25. verdicts Unanimous in most courts Hung jury Double jeopardy

26. Jury system problems 1. jurors don’t understand the process 2. personal prejudices Fear retaliation Jury nullification Professional juries???????????????????????? Improving the process 1. reduce the number of jurisdictions 2. more court-watching groups 3. more accurate statistical measurement of court performances adjudication process