[PRESS RELEASE #4] Judicial Branch Changes and Introduction of the Three Court System

Post Reply
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

[PRESS RELEASE #4] Judicial Branch Changes and Introduction of the Three Court System

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Judicial Branch Changes and Introduction of the Three Court System
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Image
  • Citizens of San Andreas,

    Following a successful press conference earlier today announcing changes coming to the branch and the introduction of the new three court system I am going to provide a transcript of the announcement so anyone who is interested in reading it can, and those who could not make it can still receive the information. Once again I am thankful for the sheer amount of support I have received from the community and law enforcement agencies since I took over as the Chief Justice. Associate Justice Mason and I are looking forward to what is to come in the future.
    Press Conference Transcript, Chief Justice Daniels wrote: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Colt Daniels and I am the Chief Justice of San Andreas. First off, I’d like to thank the Los Santos Police Department’s Traffic Enforcement Division for closing off this road for us to hold this event in the safest manner possible. I would also like to thank the members of the Department of Corrections standing behind me that are also here to protect us as is their duty while acting as bailiffs for the Judicial Branch. Finally, I would like to thank you all for being in attendance as we announce the next chapter for the San Andreas Judicial Branch.

    Just one month ago, the San Andreas Judicial Branch celebrated the one-year anniversary of operating within the State, and with my appointment as the new Chief Justice and Judith Mason’s subsequent appointment to Associate Justice, we have been working hard to come up with a variety of meaningful changes to the court system as a whole that will benefit all citizens of San Andreas.

    The first thing I would like to tell you about is the introduction to the new three court system. When any case is first introduced in the court system, it is brought to the lowest court in the State: the Superior Court of San Andreas. This can also be referred to as the Trial Court, as it is the one in which all trials, civil or criminal, are heard. While this system will support the introduction of Civil Court in the future, we are not currently equipped to accept any Civil Cases, however, we’re aiming to begin accepting Civil Cases by the end of the year. With that said, the remainder of this press conference will focus on how a Criminal Case is processed from start to finish.

    For the purpose of easy explanation, we will follow the imaginary example of Frank Lynn. Mr. Lynn has just been hypothetically arrested by a law enforcement officer for Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Possession of a Controlled Substance While Armed. The law enforcement officer seizes Mr. Lynn’s illegal items for storage in the evidence lockup and he is then transported to Bolingbroke Penitentiary to serve out his sentence.

    While Mr. Lynn is thinking about how his actions have led him to prison, he might also think about what his prospects are if he were to take this case to Criminal Trial. Interested in pursuing further, a Correction Officer might then call one of our public defense attorneys to speak with him about his options. His attorney arrives, he explains the situation facing him, and then the attorney presents him with two options: he may either elect for a criminal trial to have a judge review all of the evidence in the case against him once he completes his sentence, or he may choose to finish out his sentence and accept the charges as they have been placed.

    A new change in this restructure of the Judicial Branch is that all cases must be submitted to the Superior Court within seven days of the alleged incident in order to be heard by the court. As this change is a reduction of time in which an individual has to bring the charge to the court, we will be delaying this change to take effect on April 1st, 2022. Cases submitted prior to that date can be regarding charges placed in the past 30 days, but cases submitted after April 1st must be regarding charges placed in the past week. If a case is not submitted to the Superior Court within seven days of the placing of the charges, the case against the defendant is accepted by default and is then ineligible to be heard by the court.

    Getting back to our friend Frank Lynn; he has spoken to his appointed attorney in the visitation room at Bolingbroke Penitentiary and he has elected for trial upon being released from his detention in prison. He will then file his criminal case in the Superior Court of San Andreas in accordance with the recently published guidelines for criminal cases. As he has already been working with a specific public defense attorney, he will formally request their representation in his court filing and his attorney will confirm this as a response to the filing, which now is referred to as the Public Docket for the case.

    On the other side of the aisle, a prosecuting attorney employed by the Judicial Branch has just seen the case come into the Superior Court, so they submit a response of their own confirming that they will act as the lead prosecutor for the case against the defendant, which leads us into the next major change of specific note. Formerly, this case would have been titled Frank Lynn v. Los Santos Police Department, however, as the charge of violating the penal code originates from a rule established by the State of San Andreas, the action is against the defendant rather than the defendant bringing action against the Police Department. With the update to the court system, the original case will be titled State of San Andreas v. Frank Lynn, so that way it is clear that the prosecuting attorney, on behalf of the People of the State of San Andreas is bringing this action against the defendant.

    At this time, the presiding Judge for the case will introduce themselves on the Public Docket and will then issue what is known as an Order for Discovery. For those of you that are familiar with how the court has handled the Discovery Phase in the past, this will be a distinct departure from how the old system has worked thus far. Instead of having parties go back and forth between each other presenting and requesting specific pieces of information one at a time, the Order for Discovery will require that the prosecution present all evidence that has been gathered in connection with this case for immediate disclosure to opposing counsel in a Motion for Discovery. The defense will then be able to file discovery motions of their own, should they choose to present additional information to the court, and will also be able to submit motions to exclude certain evidence presented by the prosecution, should it be against the rules of evidence.

    The Judge will review the pending motions submitted by both sides and may schedule a hearing to hear oral arguments as to why the Judge should rule in favor of a particular party when it comes to a specific pre-trial motion.

    Let’s say that during the Motions Hearing, Mr. Frank Lynn’s attorney feels that a piece of evidence submitted by the prosecution goes against the rules of evidence and he informs the Judge that he wishes that that specific piece of evidence be ruled inadmissible, or unusable, by the prosecution at trial. Unfortunately for Mr. Lynn, the Judge does not feel the same way as Mr. Lynn’s attorney, and rules that the Motion to Suppress the evidence presented by the prosecution is denied and that the evidence will be, in fact, usable during trial. Negatively impacted, but not defeated, Mr. Lynn’s attorney feels that the trial Judge has made an error in judgment and wishes to challenge the decision that the Judge has made, which brings us to the next highest court: the San Andreas Court of Appeals.

    Contrary to the previous system, the Court of Appeals has what is known as “appellate jurisdiction.” This means that the only cases that the Court of Appeals is authorized to hear is that which appeals a certain decision made by a Judge in the Superior Court. Additionally, there are very specific conditions which must be met in order for a case to be accepted by the Court of Appeals.

    Appeals that are made before the issuance of a verdict by the Superior Court are made with the intention of pausing the case until the decision of the Superior Court Judge can be reviewed by the Court of Appeals, and usually result in the Court of Appeals making a decision for the Superior Court to then abide by and then continue as it left off.

    Appeals that are made following the issuance of a verdict by the Superior Court are made with the intention of declaring a mistrial due to an error in the trial’s procedure or errors in the Judge’s interpretation of the law, which may result in the overturning of that verdict in favor of a new trial which will then be held. Please note that the only person able to file an appeal after the issuance of a verdict by the Superior Court is the defendant or their attorney. This is due to the Double Jeopardy rule, which states that a citizen may not be placed in jeopardy of life or limb twice for the same offense. As the defendant has already been placed in jeopardy once during the original criminal trial, the prosecution cannot appeal a finding of not guilty.

    Back again to our example of Mr. Frank Lynn; the defense attorney has appealed the denial of the Motion to Suppress the evidence provided by the prosecution, but the Judge in the Court of Appeals feels that the Superior Court Judge was correct in their decision. Despite this review of the decision made by the Superior Court Judge, the defense attorney still feels that the decision made by the Superior Court Judge was incorrect and should be overturned. The only option at this stage is to petition the Supreme Court of San Andreas to hear the case.

    The Supreme Court of San Andreas is the court of highest authority within the State. All decisions made by the Supreme Court are binding to all lower courts and cases brought to the Supreme Court have the chance to overturn a ruling made in the Court of Appeals. The distinct difference in the high court, however, is that cases go through a much more stringent process and the Supreme Court is not required to review any case. Because of this, cases submitted to the Supreme Court are not guaranteed to be heard, unlike how cases brought to the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals are, at the very least, required to be preliminarily reviewed by a Judge.

    So Mr. Lynn’s defense attorney has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear his case. The Supreme Court would then ensure the case has gone through the Court of Appeals already, and will then ask for a response to be filed by the opposing side only to tell the court why the case should or should not be heard to begin with. If the Supreme Court finds that the case is of enough consequence, they will grant the petition and will now require submissions from either party on why the court should rule in their favor. Following that, the Court may allow time for both parties to present their arguments orally in front of the Court and allow the Justices sitting on the Supreme Court to ask questions of either side to determine which party should prevail.

    After hearing oral arguments, the Supreme Court will then convene in private to discuss the case and its impacts before releasing a decision and opinions from the Justices outlining why they have come to the decision that they have.

    Fortunately for Mr. Lynn, the Supreme Court ended up taking his case and eventually ruled in his favor, overturning the decisions of the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals, which in turn reverses Motion’s outcome and thus the case can continue in the Superior Court with the Motion for Suppression being granted.

    As you can see, each of the three courts has its own role to play and are separate in their duties from one another; the Superior Court hears the case and its trial from start to finish, the Court of Appeals handles any disputes regarding a decision made by a Judge in the Superior Court, and the Supreme Court has the discretion to hear a dispute regarding a decision made by a Judge in the Court of Appeals.

    We are aware that as this is such a massive change to how the Judicial Branch will be handling cases moving forward, but we are hopeful that this distinction of the three court system will make things more clear to all those involved and give each party the tools they need to be set up for a fair trial.

    With all of that said, we have some other miscellaneous changes that we would like to bring your attention to that are of particular note.

    We would like to officially announce the Self-Representation Database, a guide that outlines how the entire court process works during a Criminal Trial. Within that database, you will also find information on the motions that may be submitted during a trial, administrative paperwork that may be useful in preparing for trial, court objections that may be relevant during a hearing or examination of witnesses at trial, and information regarding the concept of plea bargaining and prosecutorial discretion, which gives prosecutors the ability to drop or amend the charges that have been placed on an individual in exchange for a guilty plea or other agreement.

    We would also like to inform the former members of the Judicial Branch that reinstatement applications are now being accepted. Unfortunately due to certain limitations, we are unable to certify attorneys for private practice in the State, and we do not plan on having this available in the near future, but this may be subject to change depending on the outcome of certain discussions.

    Another thing we would like to announce is that the Judicial Branch will be taking over the processing and issuance of restraining orders, barring certain individuals from coming within a certain distance from a person or property that has a reasonable reason to request as such. We imagine most of these requests will stem from situations including but not limited to: harassment, stalking, domestic violence, or other reasons which might cause an individual to fear for his or her safety. More details will come in the near future as this policy is still in development.

    The final thing I would like to address is the update of the Bar Ethics Review Board, which is the Judicial Branch’s form of an internal affairs department. Should you feel that a member of the Judicial Branch is worthy of a commendation or complaint, we urge you to file a report to the Bar Ethics Review Board to review the alleged incident and either reinforce positive behavior that uplifts the community or to address unethical or inappropriate behavior that violates the tenants of the Code of Ethics and oath that all licensed attorneys within the State are bound to uphold.

    Once again, I would like to offer a sincere and genuine thank you to all those who are in attendance today and the vast array of people who have supported the San Andreas Judicial Branch during its infancy in the past year, and to those who continue to show their support and appreciation of the demanding work that we do. Seriously, thank you.

    We are looking forward to another year of hard work and success in order to preserve the rights of all citizens and uphold justice within the State of San Andreas. At this time, myself and Associate Justice Mason will be accepting some questions that you may have, but if there is any confusion left over at the end of this event, I urge you to send us an email so that we can help clear anything up.

    Respectfully,
    Image
    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]

    Image
    Associate Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
Post Reply

Return to “SAJB - Public Releases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests