Chapter 4State Courts

I. Trial Courts of Limited Jurisdiction (Lower Courts)A. Size: 13,684 courts (85% of all courts). Varies from

none to 2,500 (TX). Hear 60million matters a year (mostly traffic)

B. Not part of state court system. Usually created and controlled by local gov’ts.

C. Not a court of record (no official transcript)D. Appeals go to trial court of general jurisdiction and

is heard de novo (heard entirely again).E. Criminal/Civil Cases1. Criminal cases usually concern ordinance violations

and misdemeanors (peace disturbance, shoplifting). Fines < $1000.

Often handle preliminary stages of felony cases (arraignments, bail).

2. Civil Cases: handle small claims cases with $1500-$15000 money limits. These hearings usually go quickly by dispensing with written pleas, strict rules of evidence, and jury trial rights.

II. Trial Courts of General Jurisdiction (Major Trial courts). MS name? (T 4.2)

A. Size: 2501; hear cases not specifically delegated to lower courts

B. Geographic jurisdictions usually follow county lines and are subdivided into circuits/districts.

C. Criminal/Civil1. Criminal: hear mostly street crimes (not white collar).

Most do not go to trial because of plea bargaining (not guilt, but what penalty)

2. Civil cases: outnumber criminal 2 to 1. Usually concern domestic relations (alimony, child support, divorce); Estate cases (supervise will disbursements); Personal injury (vehicle accidents to wrongful death).

III. Intermediate Courts of AppealA. Created to relieve courts of last resort B. 39 states have them (MS? Title?)C. Their decisions are usually final.IV. Courts of Last Resort: State Supreme CourtsA. TX/OK have two (criminal and civil)B. Original rarely used (disciplining lawyers/judges); primarily

discretionary (gets to pick the appeals that it hears). C. An appeal goes to U.S. Sup. Ct., but rarely accepted.MS Supreme Court has 9 justices (most states have 7).

MS Supreme Court Website

IV. The Lower Courts: A Closer LookHeavily influenced by local customs. Therefore, wide-ranging. Types:A. Justice of the Peace Courts1. Originated 14th century rural England to quickly dispense simple

justice.2. 15,000-20,000 in U.S; most with elected officials.3. Concerns: fairness (out of town speeders)B. Solutions?1. Professionalize – training programs or law degree requirements. *1/3-1/2 CA JP’s with no high school diploma; Assistant Atty General of

MS said MS JP’s “are not capable of learning the necessary elements of law”

2. Abolish JP’s? Response: People’s court: Powerful lobbies who protect their jobs.

Argue that all that is required in their cases is common sense (not a law degree).

*”These are the last bastions of the people w/o much money. It’s a place they can go to resolve their problems without the necessity of having a lawyer”

C. Municipal Courts – urban answer to JPs. Product of big-city political machines (patronage system).

D. Juvenile Courts – product of the “progressive movement” (save children from a life of crime).

1. Philosophy – system becomes a parent.

2. 1999 – 2.5m juveniles arrested.

3. Usually means below 18.

4. Three categories of juvenile matters:• Delinquency – would be a crime if committed by

adult (64%)• Status offenses – illegal only for juv’s (14%)• Child victim – neglect or dependency

V. Court Unification – shifting judicial administration from local to centralized (state capitol) control.

A. 5 reform proposals:1. Simplified Structure (consolidate, reduce number of

local/minor/specialized courts). Whole system becomes 3-tier

2. Centralized Administration – whole system is governed by state supreme court. Accountability via hierarchy.

3. Centralized rule-making – uniform rules set not by legislatures/local bodies but judges and lawyers.

4. Centralized Budgeting – have a state judicial administrator who independently prepares budget for entire system (bypass governor).

5. Statewide financing – fund the system through state revenue, not local.

B. Success of Reforms?1. While many states have moved that direction (e.g.,

4-tier), few have implemented even most of these.2. Why? • Reformers are mainly legal elites. Perhaps bias

against issues not as important to them (e.g., consumer, domestic issues)

• Resisted by lawyers, judges, and court personnel who are comfortable with status quo.

• Big city problem, not rural.• New way of thinking: centralization may be more

efficient (top-down), but specialization and diversity leads to better quality (bottom-up).

VI. Drug Courts – new thing response to drug war in 80s. Focus on treatment mainly. Quick and easy process.

A. DCs usually aim a reducing rearrests. Attys play less of a role.

B. Mixed results as to success.

C. Consequences:

1. Costs have soared for these

2. Might be increasing # of prisoners. Police and prosecutors more likely to go after small drug crimes ($10-$20) since the DC is available.