|← False Claim Act||Employment Law →|
Case brief is a short precise description of a judicial decision. Case brief is done for the purpose of a reference during research. Citation is a guideline to locating a reporter of a particular case. Citation makes it easy a case report (John, 2010).
Santa Rosa Police Officer Bryan Ellis was driving north on Fulton Road when he was flagged down by an adult male who stepped into the roadway.
The man, Mendoza told the officer that he had been involved in accident.
The officer put Mendoza in his patrol car and drove to the scene of the accident.
At the scene of the accident defendant was lying in the ditch about 20 yards from the car.
She told the officer that her legs and her back hurt.
California Highway Patrol Officer Robert Oates and his partner arrived and took over the investigations.
While being treated in an ambulance crew, Mendoza told Oates that he had been driving on Hall Road at 30 to 40 miles per hour.
He and defendant had been arguing.
Defendant grabbed the wheel and yanked it, causing him to lose control and crash.
As Mendoza described the accident to the officer Oates, defendant was placed in the ambulance, she said, "I did it. It was my fault."
Officer Oates spoke to defendant at the hospital and she admitted to have been sited and front passenger seat and arguing with Mendoza, who was her boyfriend and grabbed the steering wheel and turned it.
Defendant admitted to officer to Oates that she drank five oats before boarding Mendoza's car.
Preliminary test showed that her blood alcohol level was over 0.8 percent.
The officer concluded that by grabbing the steering wheel defendant in effect drove the car interfering with the driver, Mendoza thus caused the accident.
History of the case
The juvenile court found that defendant had committed two misdemeanors: driving under the influence of alcohol of alcohol and causing bodily injury. The court made defendant a ward of the juvenile court placed her on home probation.
The defendant was drank to the extent of 0.8 percent alcohol in her blood level.
Grabbing the steering wheel is driving.
It is against the law drive when under the influence of alcohol.
The courts decision:
The court's decision was based on defendant's confession that she grabbed the steering wheel thus causing the accident. The test of her alcohol blood level was evidence of drank driving.
The judge's rationale
The judge delivered justice in provision of section 23153, subdivision (a) :"It is unlawful for any person, while under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, to drive a vehicle and concurrently do any act forbidden by law.
The court ruled against the defendant for driving under the influence of alcohol. The officer in charge of investigation did their work well for providing the required evidence against the defendant to prove her guilty.
FEDERAL COURTS IN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
The Supreme Court under the federal government can review a decision of the court of appeals
The Supreme Court is the arbitrator of federal constitutional queries. A state court of appeals handles cases at the state level but the case can be appealed at the Supreme Court. The type of cases heard at the federal courts include cases to do with constitutionality of a law, laws and treaties of the U.S, cases involving ambassadors and public ministers, disputes between different states and bankruptcy. On the other hand, the cases heard in state courts include; cases involving wills and estates, contract cases, family law such as marriage, divorce and children adoption. Federal courts are created by the congress and which determines their jurisdiction. The president appoints judges under the consent an advice of the senate in accordance with the constitution. The president consults senator about vacancies in the federal courts (John, 2010)
STATE COURTS IN THE U.S GOVERNMENT
Trial courts of general jurisdiction which solves cases outside jurisdiction of the trial courts of lower jurisdiction.
Intermediate appellate courts are in most states between the trial courts and of general jurisdiction and the highest court in state. High state courts are known as supreme courts( Robert, H & Karen, (2006).
Lay magistrates preside over criminal trials in the magistrates' courts. Lay magistrates are ordinary citizens chosen to ensure that the community is involved in running the legal system and not on the basis their professional qualification. There are concerns of efficiency as lay magistrates are no t lawyers by profession. There are limitations on a lay magistrate's involvement since they are sited with technical staff that is qualified by profession to serve in the judiciary. However, there is an increase in number of magistrate courts using stipendiary magistrates (Robert & Karen, 2006).
The jury ensures fair conduct of the court proceedings and gives rulings in accordance with the law. In courts of appeals consist of professional judges strictly who have been promoted initially from the high court. Judges in appeals courts consists of experienced professions only. The quality and efficiency of the judicial at this level is of high standards without compromise. The professionals appointed for the running of the appeals courts undertake training for judicial work with the judicial studies board.
The jury offers citizens a way to participate in the judicial process. Jurors make decisions which have a great impact on people's lives at individual level, economic status and liberty. The jury has been recognized since time in history as a defender of human rights and liberty. The duty of the jury is taken to be very important in running democracy (John, 2010).