How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Alex Your Own Question
Alex, Engineer
Category: Homework
Satisfied Customers: 2718
Experience:  BS in Business Administration with a major in MIS. 15+ years experience in software design and development.
Type Your Homework Question Here...
Alex is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

DQ1-Jason to Tamara-Tamara,You explained that modernly, the

This answer was rated:

DQ1-Jason to Tamara-Tamara,You explained that modernly, the preliminary examination is a mini trial without a jury. Instead of the jury, a judge decides whether or not there is enough evidence to hold the defendant over for trial. Do you think that the preliminary exam is an important part of the criminal justice process? Explain why or why not?

DQ1-Jason to April-You said that a preliminary examination begins after arraignment.
An arraignment is one where the judge advises the defendant a variety of rights in
addition to the charges against him or her. A preliminary examination,
on the other hand, is a mini trial were a judge makes a determination
as to whether or not there is sufficient evidence to go forward with a
actual trial.
Why do you believe that these 2 steps are separated and not done as one?

DQ1-Jason to Rose- You said that a preliminary hearing is one where a judge
determines whether or not there is sufficient evidence to go forward
with the trial. This is correct. The preliminary hearing is an
additional step that safeguards the rights of a defendant. Prior to
the preliminary hearing, the police and the prosecution have agreed
that there is sufficient evidence to go to trial against the
defendant. However, not until the preliminary hearing is that weighed
by a third-party. The judge is the third-party that will listen to the
prosecution, the defense, and review evidence to determine whether not
there is in fact sufficient evidence to hold somebody over for
trial.When a judge makes a determination, what burden of proof do you
think the judges uses ? For example, at the actual trial, we know the
jury uses the burden of proof that is called "beyond a reasonable
doubt." Therefore, the judge must use one that's below that burden.
How do you think the judge makes the determination whether or not
there is enough evidence to go to trial?

DQ1-Billie-According to Criminal Procedure (2012), preliminary examination is determining probable cause for the issue of an arrest warrant, the purpose is determine that a crime did take place and the probability that an arrest must be made because the cause and the evidence suggest it is so. A grand jury is when the prosecution presents the case to a group of citizens of the defendants peers, and based on the evidence the jurors are asked to determine if probable cause exists. Preliminary examination applies to individual rights by the fact that the law must have their facts in order such as the probable cause to the unlawful act in order to get the warrant for the arrest, in simplified form the criminal justice system must prove that the act was in fact committed and all the proper procedures were followed in obtaining any evidence meaning it wasn't tempered with in the field or the lab if necessary. For individual rights this could mean that they could get away with a crime if any wrong doing is done by the system, but mainly it is to prove that evidence and such proof exists for the arrest. In a sense it could give the suspect a way out. What are your thoughts?

DQ2-Fenisa to me-Great post. I'm glad that the prosecution has the duty to disclose exculpatory information because this keeps the innocent from going to jail; however, I feel that there is still a flaw. Even though the prosecution must reveal any information in his or her possession, here in the U.S. I read that the information does not have to be disclosed before the defendant makes a plea of guilty or not guilty. To me this seem backwards. I would think that the prosecution would want to offer up the information at any given time in order to keep from wasting everyone's time. What are your thoughts?

DQ2- Fenisa-An example of exculpatory information is if the defendant is on trial for murder but at the time of the murder there is video proof that he or she was in a department store at the cash register tending a transaction at the exact time that the murder took place. The exculpatory information is what will clear the defendant of guilt.

The disclosure of exculpatory information impacts the criminal proceedings within the criminal justice systems because that information is what stops an unnecessary trial from continuing on and it keeps the innocent defendant from wrongful conviction and keeps them out of prison. The prosecution does not have a duty to search for exculpatory information in order to help clear the defendant; however, the prosecutor has the duty of making any exculpatory information his or her possession. It is also the prosecution's duty to disclose any exculpatory information that may be in possession of any member of his or team, such as the police officer, investigator, or crime lab.

If it was not the prosecutors duty to disclose exculpatory evidence, there would be a large amount of innocent people wrongfully convicted and in prison. In addition, I believe that not disclosing the information would be a violation of the defendants rights of due process. Withholding pertin

You need to spend $3 to view this post. Add Funds to your account and buy credits.
Alex and other Homework Specialists are ready to help you