|
Plea
In legal terms, a plea is simply an answer to a claim made by someone in a criminal case under common law using the adversarial system. Colloquially, a plea has come to mean the assertion by a defendant at arraignment, or otherwise in response to a criminal charge, whether that person pleaded or pled guilty, not guilty, ''nolo contendere'' (a.k.a. no contest), no case to answer (in the United Kingdom), or Alford plea (in the United States). The concept of the plea is one of the significant differences between criminal procedure under common law and procedure under the civil law system. Under common law, a defendant who pleads guilty is automatically convicted, and the remainder of the trial is used to determine the sentence. This produces a system known as plea bargaining, in which defendants may plead guilty in exchange for a more lenient punishment. In civil law jurisdictions, a confession by the defendant is treated like any other piece of evidence. A full confession does ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Plea Bargain
A plea bargain (also plea agreement or plea deal) is an agreement in criminal law proceedings, whereby the prosecutor provides a concession to the defendant in exchange for a plea of guilt or '' nolo contendere.'' This may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to a less serious charge, or to one of the several charges, in return for the dismissal of other charges; or it may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to the original criminal charge in return for a more lenient sentence. A plea bargain allows both parties to avoid a lengthy criminal trial and may allow criminal defendants to avoid the risk of conviction at trial on a more serious charge. For example, in the legal system of the United States, a criminal defendant charged with a felony theft charge, the conviction of which would require imprisonment in state prison, may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to a misdemeanor theft charge, which may not carry a custodial sentence. In cases such as an automob ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Alford Plea
In United States law, an Alford plea, also called a Kennedy plea in West Virginia, an Alford guilty plea, and the Alford doctrine, is a guilty plea in criminal court, whereby a defendant in a criminal case does not admit to the criminal act and asserts innocence, but admits that the evidence presented by the prosecution would be likely to persuade a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This can be caused by circumstantial evidence and testimony favoring the prosecution and difficulty finding evidence and witnesses that would aid the defense. Alford pleas are legally permissible in nearly all U.S. federal and state courts, except in the state courts of Indiana, Michigan, and New Jersey, or in the courts of the United States Armed Forces. Origin The ''Alford'' guilty plea is named after the United States Supreme Court case of ''North Carolina v. Alford'' (1970). Henry Alford had been indicted on a charge of first-degree murder in 1963. E ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Nolo Contendere
' is a legal term that comes from the Latin phrase for "I do not wish to contend". It is also referred to as a plea of no contest or no defense. In criminal trials in certain United States jurisdictions, it is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty. A no-contest plea, while not technically a guilty plea, typically has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain. In many jurisdictions, a plea of ' is not a typical right and carries various restrictions on its use. United States In the United States, state law determines whether, and under what circumstances, a defendant may plead no contest in state criminal cases. In federal court, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure only allow a ' plea to be entered with the court's consent; before accepting the plea, the court is required to "consider the parties' views and the public interest in t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Arraignment
Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal charging document in the presence of the defendant, to inform them of the charges against them. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea. Acceptable pleas vary among jurisdictions, but they generally include " guilty", "not guilty", and the peremptory pleas, or pleas in bar, setting out reasons why a trial cannot proceed. Pleas of '' nolo contendere'' ("no contest") and the Alford plea are allowed in some circumstances. Australia In Australia, arraignment is the first of 11 stages in a criminal trial, and involves the clerk of the court reading out the indictment. The judge will testify during the indictment process. Canada In every province in Canada, except British Columbia, defendants are arraigned on the day of their trial. In British Columbia, arraignment takes place in one of the first few court appearances by the defendant or their lawyer. The defendant is asked whether they plead guilty ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Peine Forte Et Dure
' (Law French for "hard and forceful punishment") was a method of torture formerly used in the common law legal system, in which a defendant who refused to plead ("stood mute") would be subjected to having heavier and heavier stones placed upon his or her chest until a plea was entered, or death resulted. Many defendants charged with capital offences would refuse to plead in order to avoid forfeiture of property. If the defendant pleaded either guilty or not guilty and was executed, their heirs would inherit nothing, their property escheating to the State. If they refused to plead their heirs would inherit their estate, even if they died in the process. Legal background The common law courts originally took a very limited view of their own jurisdiction. They considered themselves to lack jurisdiction over a defendant until he had voluntarily submitted to it by entering a plea seeking judgment from the court. Obviously, a criminal justice system that could punish only those who ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Plea Colloquy
A plea colloquy, in United States criminal procedure, is a conversation between a judge and a criminal defendant who has been sworn under oath, which must occur when the defendant enters a guilty plea in court in order for the plea to be valid. The United States Supreme Court has crafted a doctrine which requires the court to engage in a specific line of inquiry. Because a guilty plea must be made intelligently, knowingly, and voluntarily, the court must advise the defendant of the following things: #The nature of the charge #The potential penalties which might result from the plea, including any mandatory minimum sentence #The defendant's rights to not plead guilty, and to request a jury trial. The court must ask the defendant if he understands each of these points, and must receive a voluntary affirmative response. Many courts use a script of the questions which the judge will ask the defendant and the defense attorney in a specific order. Failure by the court to advise the defe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Common Law (legal System)
In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions."The common law is not a brooding omnipresence in the sky, but the articulate voice of some sovereign or quasi sovereign that can be identified," ''Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen'', 244 U.S. 205, 222 (1917) (Oliver Wendell Holmes, dissenting). By the early 20th century, legal professionals had come to reject any idea of a higher or natural law, or a law above the law. The law arises through the act of a sovereign, whether that sovereign speaks through a legislature, executive, or judicial officer. The defining characteristic of common law is that it arises as precedent. Common law courts look to the past decisions of courts to synthesize the legal principles of past cases. ''Stare decisis'', the principle that cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Giles Corey
Giles Corey ( August 1611 – September 19, 1692) was an English-born American farmer who was accused of witchcraft along with his wife Martha Corey during the Salem witch trials. After being arrested, Corey refused to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. He was subjected to pressing in an effort to force him to plead—the only example of such a sanction in American history—and died after three days of this torture. Because Corey refused to enter a plea, his estate passed on to his sons instead of being seized by the local government. Corey is believed to have died in the field adjacent to the prison that had held him, in what later became the Howard Street Cemetery in Salem, which opened in 1801. His exact grave location in the cemetery is unmarked and unknown. There is a memorial plaque to him in the nearby Charter Street Cemetery. Pre-trial history Giles Corey was born in Northampton, England. He was baptized in the church of the Holy Sepulchre on August 16, 1611. Gil ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Salem Witch Trials
The Salem witch trials were a series of hearings and prosecutions of people accused of witchcraft in colonial Massachusetts between February 1692 and May 1693. More than 200 people were accused. Thirty people were found guilty, 19 of whom were executed by hanging (14 women and five men). One other man, Giles Corey, was pressed to death after refusing to enter a plea, and at least five people died in jail. Arrests were made in numerous towns beyond Salem and Salem Village (known today as Danvers), notably Andover and Topsfield. The grand juries and trials for this capital crime were conducted by a Court of Oyer and Terminer in 1692 and by a Superior Court of Judicature in 1693, both held in Salem Town, where the hangings also took place. It was the deadliest witch hunt in the history of colonial North America. Only fourteen other women and two men had been executed in Massachusetts and Connecticut during the 17th century. The episode is one of Colonial America's most no ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Double Jeopardy
In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence (primarily in common law jurisdictions) that prevents an accused person from being Trial, tried again on the same (or similar) charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases Prosecutorial misconduct, prosecutorial and/or Judicial misconduct, judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law. In Civil law (common law), civil law, a similar concept is that of . Variation in common law countries is the peremptory plea, which may take the specific forms of ('previously acquitted') or ('previously convicted'). These doctrines appear to have originated in ancient Roman law, in the broader principle ('not twice against the same'). Availability as a legal defence If a double-jeopardy issue is raised, evidence will be placed before the court, which will typically rule as a preliminary matter whether the plea is substantiated; if it is, the projected trial will ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Witchcraft
Witchcraft traditionally means the use of magic or supernatural powers to harm others. A practitioner is a witch. In medieval and early modern Europe, where the term originated, accused witches were usually women who were believed to have used malevolent magic against their own community, and often to have communed with evil beings. It was thought witchcraft could be thwarted by protective magic or counter-magic, which could be provided by cunning folk or folk healers. Suspected witches were also intimidated, banished, attacked or killed. Often they would be formally prosecuted and punished, if found guilty or simply believed to be guilty. European witch-hunts and witch trials in the early modern period led to tens of thousands of executions. In some regions, many of those accused of witchcraft were folk healers or midwives. European belief in witchcraft gradually dwindled during and after the Age of Enlightenment. Contemporary cultures that believe in magic and the s ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Adversarial System
The adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries where two advocates represent their parties' case or position before an impartial person or group of people, usually a judge or jury, who attempt to determine the truth and pass judgment accordingly. It is in contrast to the inquisitorial system used in some civil law systems (i.e. those deriving from Roman law or the Napoleonic code) where a judge investigates the case. The adversarial system is the two-sided structure under which criminal trial courts operate, putting the prosecution against the defense. Basic features As an accused is not compelled to give evidence in a criminal adversarial proceeding, they may not be questioned by a prosecutor or judge unless they choose to be; however, should they decide to testify, they are subject to cross-examination and could be found guilty of perjury. As the election to maintain an accused person's right to silence prevents any examinat ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.png "Click for more on -> Common Law (legal System)")
