Você está na página 1de 4

Oates 1

Jordan Oates
3/25/13
CRIM 432

Court Observation
I observed five total cases. The first four I observed all occurred under the jurisdiction of
District 49-1-01, which is presided by Judge Carmine W. Prestia. The first case I observed
occurred at 3:00pm on February 14
th
. A college-aged, white male was charged with Criminal
Mischief. He apparently had done $300 worth of damage to Canyon Pizza. Apparently, the
owner of Canyon Pizza has agreed to drop the charges if the defendant pays the $300 it would
take to repair Canyon Pizza. Judge Prestia then set a court date for the following Friday, and the
trial would continue if the defendant had not paid for the damages.
The second case was at 3:30pm, and this case involved a white, female student under the
age of twenty-one. The defendant was charged with underage drinking and public drunkenness.
If the defendant plead guilty to the underage and also did community service, then she would
have her public drunkenness charge dropped.
The third case was at 3:45pm, and this case involved a middle-aged, white female. The
defendant was charged with disobedience to traffic. She had apparently ran a red light, which
she claimed was when she had fallen ill. She had previously plead guilty, Judge preceded to
come up with a payment plan for the defendant to pay her fine.
Oates 2

The fourth case was at 4:00pm, and the defendant was a white male, approximately
between twenty-one and twenty-two years of age. He was issued an unlawful noise citation after
neighbors of the defendant called the police about loud music. At 2:49 AM, an officer arrived at
the apartment complex and could hear music from the complex entrance, coming from the end of
the hall. The music was the band Blues Traveler. Upon knocking, the officer observed a three to
four person party. The defendant refused to excuse people from his apartment, claimed to not
know how loud the music was, but signed the citation issued. The defendant pled not guilty in
court, but was found guilty and had to pay a $170 fine within thirty days.
The fifth and final case I observed was under the jurisdiction of District 49-3-05, which
was presided by interim judge Judge Ronald Horner. The case was at 1:30pm on March 12
th
. A
twenty-two, recently graduated white female was charged with public drunkenness. The police
had gotten called about a conscious female at Pickles Tap Room for a possible alcohol
overdose. She was taken to the hospital, and likewise charged. She received twenty hours of
community service, which she must complete in sixty days. If she doesnt, she pleads guilty to
the offense and receives a minimal fine of $300.
Almost every case I observed involved plea bargaining of some sort. In the criminal
mischief case, the defendant would be cleared of all charges as long as he paid the owner of
Canyon Pizza damage expenses. The second defendant I observed was given community service
to complete, which would eliminate her public drunkenness charge. The defendant in the final
case I observed was given community service in lieu of a guilty verdict. In my opinion, all of the
plea deals were made to help out the defendant primarily, while also speeding the moving of
cases. The defendant in the criminal mischief case will not have the charge on his record as long
as he pays for the damages. Likewise, the second defendant was not given the public
Oates 3

drunkenness charge, assuming she would do community service. The final defendant also was
given community service in exchange for her public drunkenness charge being dropped.
However, the second defendant did not have her underage charge dropped because this was the
second time she was charged with an underage.
All of the cases also sped up the moving of cases. If a defendant had a fine(s) to pay as a
result of guilty verdicts, the case would still be open until the defendant paid off the fine. The
charges would also go on their record, which would result in added paperwork.
Only one of the defendants had a defense attorney. The defense attorney seemed to be
very friendly and talkative. He talked to the judge and police officer about both interesting cases
he had heard about recently, and his family and personal life. The police officer, judge, and
defense attorney were all on a first-name basis. I definitely sense that there is a courtroom
community among the police officers, defense attorneys, and judges. I assume this is because
these individuals see each other day in and day out, especially in a small town such as State
College. They also can relate to each other in regards to how difficult certain cases are, the
annoyance of certain behaviors by defendants, and the technical knowledge of how the court
system works. The defendant who the defense attorney was representing almost seemed like a
bystander, especially considering she barely spoke during her trial.
After observing the court cases, I do believe that the decision making in the cases was
justified and fair. The defendant who was charged with criminal mischief would have his
charges dropped as long as he paid for the damages which he caused. I feel this is a just sentence
as he wont have a record since he repaired what he damaged. The defendants who also pled
guilty and received community service were also treated fairly. In exchange for fines and a
Oates 4

criminal record for doing something stupid yet just a part of growing up and making mistakes,
they can instead help out the community. The defendant who was found guilty of the traffic
violation was recently laid off and is having financial trouble. The judge then allowed her
monthly payments of her fine to be less than he wanted to give after hearing of her situation.

Você também pode gostar