Summative Assessment Issues

docx

School

Kenyatta University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

101

Subject

Law

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by patriciakenya17

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 1 Summative Assessment Issues Student’s Name Institution Course Tutor Date

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 2 Summative Assessment Issues Court case; Public shooting at a gym in California that resulted in grievous injuries and death of one person. Question 1 In this case, the crime control model was considered necessary for the guilty party. Given the nature of the crime, I agree the crime control model is relevant and needed for the well-being of the community. The crime control model considered this court case a slam dunk, and there was no need to spend resources and much time on ascertaining the rights of the guilty party since the criminal was arrested on the spot by the law enforcers. This way, there was no need for them to expand the evidence collected or any investigation process to ascertain their findings. Question 2 The due process model has issues stemming from the fact that it focuses on ensuring a just and fair criminal justice for all the people. With this understanding, the judge is forced to provide a ruling that does not infringe the constitutional rights of the people, regardless of the nature of the court case ( Hayes & Lynn, 2020 ). This way, the legal process under this model tends to consume a lot of resources and time without providing a substantial outcome. For instance, if this case followed the due process model, it would have demanded the execution of formalized legal practices in regard to the case in order to hold the guilty party accountable for the shooting crime. The model would want to take each necessary constitutional step to avoid error and ensure the rights of both parties are adhered to before providing a ruling ( Hayes & Lynn, 2020) . This whole process would be unnecessary for this case since all the needed evidence to determine the fate of the guilty party was gathered on the spot, and there was no need for further research.

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 3 Question 3 This case was dealt with by the state court. Since the crime entailed an unlawful shooting at a local gym that resulted in the injury of people, it was a violation of state law. Question 4 The federal courts are often too slow in the legal process ( Zambrano, 2019 ). This issue stems from different factors ranging from limited personnel to poor structures to regulate the processing of court cases. This challenge significantly affects how people access justice since a slow process can delay the justice of victims. Equally, a slow process encourages tampering with the court evidence, which would eventually affect the delivery of justice ( Zambrano, 2019) . Federal courts also provide limited legal representation to individuals with legal grievances. Question 5 The guilty party was sentenced to 22 years in prison. The California sentencing guidelines for this case conveyed a period of 10 years in prison for using the weapon, up to 20 years for firing, and up to 25 years for seriously injuring or killing an individual. However, these guidelines were amended in 2017, allowing the judge to strike or dismiss the guidelines in the interest of serving justice to all parties ( Roberts and Plesničar, 2015 ). Question 6 Some of the challenges witnessed in sentencing include the lack of uniform punishments for the offenders. The justice process sometimes considers aspects such as gender, ethnicity, race, and mental health status prior to providing sentencing ( Roberts and Plesničar, 2015 ). Also, the sentencing challenges stem from the federal goal to increase imprisonment while reducing the probation of convicts has significantly affected the justice process. It has reduced the population

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 4 of freed convicts, especially those that have passed the required correctional standards and served a long period in the correctional facilities. In this case, there lacked uniform sentencing since the guilty party was considered sane. Question 7 In this case, the guilty party did not appeal the sentencing. The California law provides 30 days for a guilty party to file their notice of appeal after a misdemeanor and 60 days after their felony judgment. If the guilty party that is interested in an appeal fails to meet these guidelines, then they automatically lose their right to appeal the conviction ( Roberts and Plesničar, 2015 ). Question 8 In post-conviction, the motion to reconsider the sentencing is presented to the trial court and not the appellate court ( Leverick et al., 2017) . It allows the guilty party to provide new evidence regarding how the case was presented, such as the presentation of the lawyer responsible for the defense and how such actions negatively impacted their right to justice. This is not, however, the case for an appeal since it is regarded as an examination of the activities in the trial court to ascertain if the trial judge made grievous mistakes that affected the trial outcome ( Leverick et al., 2017 ). The post-conviction procedure provides an opportunity for convicted individuals to provide new information or more evidence after a judgment has occurred ( Leverick et al., 2017 ). When the defendant has valid grounds for the claims presented in the post-conviction process, they have an opportunity to access fair resolution to their case. On the other hand, the innocent protection Act of 2004 is a law that supports justice for the administration of death penalties while avoiding the risks of executing innocent individuals ( Norris, 2017) . Both the Act and the post-conviction

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 5 procedure are similar in the sense that they ensure the achievement of justice among the wrongfully convicted persons. The Act is also supported in the post-conviction procedure as it allows the affected people to conduct DNA testing to build on their claims.

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT ISSUES 6 References Hayes, A., & Lynn, T. (2020). Due Process vs. Crime Control Models of Justice. Leverick, F., Campbell, K., & Callander, I. (2017). Post-conviction review: Questions of innocence, independence, and necessity. Stetson L. Rev. , 47 , 45. Norris, R. J. (2017). Framing DNA: Social movement theory and the foundations of the innocence movement. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , 33 (1), 26-42. Roberts, J. V., & Plesničar, M. M. (2015). Sentencing, legitimacy, and public opinion. In Trust and Legitimacy in Criminal Justice (pp. 33-51). Springer, Cham. Zambrano, D. A. (2019). Federal Expansion and the Decay of State Courts. The University of Chicago Law Review , 86 (8), 2101-2192.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Summative Assessment Issues

Related Documents