C U TO MA T IE O RR O CI T S VI

fr J n Pr ea o C ad a l l ag

C T
c urri ul c um te hnol y c og

CURRICULUM TECHNOLOGY

Courtroom Activities for CJ and Paralegal

LEAD AUTHOR:
Shel Silver

CONTRIBUTORS:
Daniel Byram Brittany Nicol

EDITOR:
Jennifer-Lynn Jennings

-i-

Courtroom Activities for CJ and Paralegal Copyright 2011 by Curriculum Technology LLC. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the United States of America No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission of both the publisher and the copyright holder of this book. Publisher: Cover Design: Photography: Channel Custom Publishing 3520 Seagate Way, Ste. 115, Oceanside, CA 92056 David Barnes All photographs courtesy of Curriculum Technology, LLC.

Manufactured in the United States of America 1st edition Curriculum Technology LLC 2005 ISBN 978-0-9837570-2-3 WARNING: Re-creation of any case study or event listed in the materials may result in injury or property damage if extensive care is not taken at all times. Curriculum Technology and Channel Publishing are not responsible for any injuries or damage to property that may occur from the use of referenced equipment or any other supplies. Activities derived from this book should be conducted with oversight by, and at the direction of, a qualified instructor. *** This textbook contains completely original content unless otherwise specified. Due diligence was taken in the evaluation of this content to protect the copyrights of others. Any duplication of any copyrighted material or any content found within this textbook that is improperly cited is completely unintentional.

- ii -

Table of Contents

About the Team Preface by Shel Silver Icon Guide Conducting a Hearing Evidence Suppression Hearing Proving Elements of Breaking and Entering Interpreting Intent to Kill Element in Murder Qualifying and QuestioningScientific Expert Witness Preliminary Hearing Motion in Limine and Motion to Dismiss Motion Hearing Summary Judgment Guilty Plea and Allocution Based Upon Plea Bargain Presentation of Insanity Defense Sentencing Hearing Civil Suit: Negligence Civil Commitment Hearing Juvenile Court Waiver Hearing

v vii vii viii 1 8 14 20 28 34 40 48 54 60 66 72 78

- iii -

Child Custody Hearing Unemployment Benefits Appeal Condemnation Compensation Appeal Zoning Waiver Request Real Property Tax Valuation Appeal State Department of Environmental Quality: Permit Denial Appeal Reverse Condemnation

84 90 96 102 110 116 124

- iv -

About the Team

Shel Silver Lead Author
Originally from Detroit, Shel Silver received his J.D. from Washington University School of Law. His career experience includes time spent as: Assistant Michigan Attorney General handling both criminal, civil and appellate work Chair of Legal Administration (Criminal Justice and Paralegal) at the University of Detroit-Mercy Environmental litigator in private practice Administrative law judge Environmental Enforcement Coordinator (Arizona) Deputy Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings (Arizona) Justice and Legal Studies Chair (Criminal Justice, Paralegal and Homeland Security) at Parks College of Aurora, Colorado Independent security and management consultant Author of both fiction and educational materials Shel is married to Cyndi; they have four grown daughters and seven grandchildren. The Silvers live in Denver with their two dogs, Punam and Schmutz.

Daniel Byram Contributor

Daniel Byram retired from law enforcement as a police academy and training director for an agency of over 1,000 members. He served for many years as a police lieutenant, commanding an elite special investigations unit of detectives. He has received numerous commendations recognizing his service from agencies including the DEA and the NYPD. He taught criminal justice at the college level for 13 years and is the author or co-author of several books, including Introduction to Homeland Security; Crime Scene Dynamics; Fingerprints; Current Events in Homeland Security; Security Principles, Practices, and Procedures; Intelligence Principles; and Crime Scenes.

-v-

Brittany Nicol Contributor

Brittany Nicol pursued her passion for the law by obtaining her J.D. from San Joaquin College of Law in her hometown of Fresno, CA. During her studies, she worked for the Fresno County District Attorneys Office in the Misdemeanor and Homicide Units, gaining invaluable experience as a Certified Law Student. Brittany graduated from California Baptist University in Riverside, California with a Bachelors Degree in Political Science. She currently resides in Cayucos, California with her husband, Chris.

Jennifer-Lynn Jennings Editor

Jennifer-Lynn Jennings has devoted her professional life to the craft of writing. She has held positions such as editor, copywriter, writing instructor and news producer. She earned an M.A. in English Language and Literature from the University of New Orleans, and a B.A. in English Literature from the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.

Preface
The American Courtroom has been a source of drama and emotion, one that portrays the American experience. Perhaps no other aspect of American life has been more exhaustively explored in both fact and fiction; yet few aspects of our lives are so poorly understood. While the inner workings of the courtroom are a mystery to most, it is an arena that the Criminal Justice or Paralegal student must understand in order to pursue their chosen careers. I was told early on that you learn by doing, and I have always found this maxim to be true. The activities herein give students the opportunity to explore a number of issues within a courtroom setting, and to discover how the law really works. These scenarios are all based upon real cases. Some I have studied, and some I have experienced firsthand. In most cases, Ive changed the facts somewhat to protect the innocent and, more importantly, to create a better educational experience.

Enjoy! Shel Silver

Icon Guide
The following icons indicate student participation and interaction.

Discussion Questions
Watch the news story at:
http://www.channelcustom.com/ courtroomactivities

Group Activity

Each activity is supplemented by a newsclip. Click on the accompanying link to view the newscast.

These prompts are designed to help you prepare for the group activity, while capturing and summarizing the key elements of the case.

This is your chance to prepare for, and participate in, the case laid out in this activity.

Use this space to prepare your case or to summarize important details mentioned in class.

- vii -

Conducting a Hearing
Before the activities included in this book are undertaken, an understanding of the trial process is necessary. Criminal trials are prosecuted by government attorneys (such as District Attorneys or States Attorneys) who seek justice on behalf of the general public. The criminal defendant is alleged to have committed a crime; he is represented by either a court appointed attorney or by his own defense lawyer. In contrast, civil proceedings are initiated by a plaintiff who is seeking compensation for a given action (or failure to act). In a criminal trial, an opening statement is given by the prosecutor, who explains the case and the charges against the defendant. The defendants attorney may offer an opening statement immediately following the prosecutor, or may opt to wait until the State rests its case. Civil and criminal court both require the plaintiff to present his case first. It is not until the plaintiff has rested that the defendant calls his witnesses and presents his evidence. The examination of a witness during a court proceeding must follow legal procedures. The prosecutor calls his first witness to testify on direct examination; he asks questions in order to elicit the information he is attempting to prove, and the witness answers accordingly. The defense attorney then cross-examines the same witness in an attempt to discredit the testimony, witness knowledge of facts or his personal credibility. During cross-examination, questions should be limited to the matters covered under direct examination. After cross, re-direct examination takes place, allowing the prosecution another opportunity to question the witness in order to clarify issues or rebut information the defense brought forth. Finally, the defense examines the witness on re-cross examination before the witness is excused. After the prosecutor has presented all of their evidence and examined their witnesses, he rests his case. It is now the defense attorneys opportunity to present his case, call witnesses and offer evidence. The order of examination is now reversed; the defense lawyer conducts direct examination, the prosecution cross-examines, the defendant is on re-direct, and the State re-cross examines. Following the close of a defendants case, rebuttal ensues, where the prosecution may call witnesses to counter the defendants case. Before the trial is complete, closing statements are given by both lawyers to make their arguments and zealously represent their client or the interests of the State. The judge must then issue a ruling based on the law and the evidence presented.

- viii -

Evidence Suppression Hearing

The Importance of Search Warrants: Probable Cause

Evidence Suppression Hearing Evidence Sup

Objectives:
Students will successfully simulate a pre-trial evidence suppression hearing. During the proceedings, an understanding of the following shall be demonstrated:

The procedure for an evidentiary pre-trial hearing Search warrants and their relation to the Fourth Amendment The exception to, and limitations of, a search warrant The purpose and application of the exclusionary rule in a criminal case Watch the news story at:
http://www.channelcustom.com/ courtroomactivities

-1-

Legal Review
The Fourth Amendment prohibits the government from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures. In accordance with the Fourth Amendment, the government is required to obtain a valid search warrant signed by a judge, who will grant a search warrant if he believes probable cause exists. Once issued, the scope of the search is limited to the particular places and items detailed in the search warrant. Executing a warrant requires law enforcement to knock and announce their presence, unless it would be dangerous, futile, or would result in a destruction of evidence. There are several occasions in which the government does not need a warrant to conduct a legally valid search. A warrant is not required if exigent circumstances are present. A circumstance is exigent if officers have a reasonable belief that an emergency requires an immediate response. Other common exceptions to the warrant requirement include, but are not limited to: searching a person after a lawful arrest is made; seizing contraband in plain view of an officer if he has a legally justified reason for being at the location; and voluntary consent from a person legally capable of consenting. Once an investigation is complete, the evidence seized is evaluated in a pre-trial evidentiary hearing. At the hearing, the attorney attempting to introduce the evidence into trial is required to prove its relevance. The opposing counsel will attempt to have the evidence suppressed, and the judge makes the final decision as to what evidence the jury will hear. Evidence is relevant if its existence will make a theory of the case seem more probable. However, the judge has the discretion to exclude the evidence if its introduction will result in unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or a waste of the courts time. Evidence is also subjected to the exclusionary rule, which prohibits the introduction of illegally seized evidence at trial.

Facts
Deborah Jenkins and her boyfriend, Jack Larson, were arrested as a result of a drug bust. Jenkins was making dinner for her children and Jack was in the living room when the police, lead by Lt. Frank Krupke, broke down her door. Only Deborahs name is on the lease, but Larson has been living in the home for the last year. The police found several ounces of cocaine, packaging material, scales, and a large amount of currency in small denominations in Jenkins and Larsons bedroom. The cocaine was found in a dresser drawer, but the rest of the items were on the bed, in plain view. They were both charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Larson and Jackson each claimed to have no knowledge of the cocaine.

-2-

On the day in question, the police broke down the door without knocking. There was no other physical damage to the house but the house was turned upside down. The police properly collected and tagged all of the evidence, and immediately transported it to the police evidence room. The police questioned Jenkins daughters, Zoe (age 2 ) and Chloe (age 8). Zoe was crying and had no coherent statement about the incident. Chloe told the police that she saw Larson with the white powder and that he said it was bubble bath and a surprise for mommy and that Chloe should keep it secret. An informant told Lt. Krupke about the cocaine. The informant, whose name was not revealed, has provided reliable information in the past. The police were watching the house while waiting for a warrant. They claim they heard screams and decided to enter the house due to the knowledge that young children were in the house. The warrant was delivered one hour later.

-3-

IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR COUNTY OF CAPITAL AND STATE OF MIDAMERICA Search Warrant To: FRANK KRUPKE, an officer authorized by law and any other officer authorized to execute search warrants within the County of Capital, State of MidAmerica. YOUR AFFIANT, having this date filed an affidavit for a search warrant in conformity with the provisions of Rule 41, MidAmerica Rule of Procedure and M.R.S. 16-3-301, et, seq., as amended, for the following described PROPERTY, to wit: Cocaine, packaging material, scales, currency and paraphernalia associated with its use, sales and transportation. Believed to be located at: 123 Main Street Capital City, MidAmerica 00000 Upon one or more grounds set forth in Rule 41, MidAmerica Rule of Procedure and M.R.S. 16-3-30, et, seq., as amended, namely: Which is stolen or embezzled; or X Which is designed or intended for use as a means for committing a crime; or X Which is or had been used as a means of committing a criminal offense; or X The possession of which is illegal; or X Which would be material evidence in a subsequent criminal prosecution in this state or in another state I am satisfied that there is probable cause to believe that the property so described is located at the premises described above and that grounds for this search warrant exist. YOU ARE THEREFORE COMMANDED to search the premises described above and seize those items described. YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED to leave a copy of the search warrant and receipt for the property taken with the person from whom or from whose premises the property is taken; or, in lieu thereof, to leave a copy of the search warrant and receipt at the place from which the property is taken. YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED to make return of this search warrant and a written inventory of the property taken to the undersigned judge within ten days from date thereof. On the basis of the information set forth in the affidavit and pursuant to M.R.S. 16-3-301, et. Seq., as mentioned, You ARE authorized to execute this search warrant in the manner set forth above.

____________________________________ Dated this 4th day of July, 2008

______________________________________ Judge Roy Bean

-4-

Group Activity

Roles
Defense Attorney for Deborah Jenkins Defense Attorney for Jack Larson Deborah Jenkins Jack Larson Chloe Jenkins District Attorney Lt. Frank Krupke The Judge

TIP: QUESTIONING A WITNESS

When preparing witness questions, draft the the answer expected. This will keep the attorney focused on eliciting the information needed, while helping the witness to stay alert.

Instructions
In groups of two or three, use the discussion topics found in the Discussion Questions to serve as a guide to formulate legal arguments and reasoning for the suppression or admission of evidence gathered. The Defense Attorneys for Jenkins and Larson will conduct an evidentiary hearing with the purpose of excluding all evidence obtained during the bust from the trial. The District Attorney will oppose this exclusion, and will seek to have the evidence ruled admissible. In preparation for the hearing, all attorneys must draft questions to be asked of the testifying witnesses. These questions should seek to elicit answers which will support their case. The attorneys may each make an opening statement, call and examine witnesses, and cross-examine witnesses called by other counsel. The attorneys may then make closing arguments. The witnesses will accurately testify according to the facts provided within this activity. The witnesses should know the case well in order to accurately facilitate the hearing. The judge will assist in the proceeding by listening and determining the admissibility of each piece of evidence. The judge should have a good understanding of courtroom procedures, the Fourth Amendment, and the exclusionary rule so that well informed rulings can be made.

-5-

Discussion Questions

1. Is the fact that Larson is not on the lease important? If so, can Larson object to the search?

2. If the warrant is invalid and police rely upon exigent circumstances and plain view, would the cocaine fall under this protection?

3. All of the drug paraphernalia was found in the bedroom. If the police entry was based upon exigent circumstances instead of the warrant, did the officers have a right to go into the bedroom?

4. Are the statements made by Zoe and Chloe relevant? If so, why?

-6-