Trials and Verdicts assignment
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Trials and Verdicts assignment
Trials and Verdicts
Due Week 8 and worth 200 points
In preparation for this assignment, please view the Jurisville scenarios and resulting simulations from Weeks 5 through 7 in Unit 2: Courts.
In the scenarios and resulting simulations, Tim Smith, senior criminal lawyer, discusses select cases and asks a paralegal to indicate which courts would have exclusive jurisdiction of the cases in question. He also discusses various pretrial procedures and illustrates them with select cases. Finally, Tim Smith introduces the case of Roland Gary, who served twenty-three (23) years in prison for a crime that he did not commit. The case brought to light several key issues, along with the manner in which they were resolved.
Use the Internet to research three real-life cases from the past five (5) years that fit the following criteria:
- Cases that depict the unique processes related to different courts
- The defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial
- The defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated
Write a three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:
- Discuss one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and identify the court that took jurisdiction. Explain why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.
- Discuss the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Give your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Provide a rationale for the response.
- Discuss the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Explore one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Describe the resolution to the selected case.
- Use at least three (3) quality resources in this assignment. Note:Wikipedia and similar Websites do not qualify as quality resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
- Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
- Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
If You Can Do This Assignment According To The Instructions Above And The Rubric Exemplary Column Below Then I Can Use Your Help If Not Don’t Bother Requesting Assignment!!!
Trials and Verdicts assignment
Points: 200 Assignment 2: Trials and Verdicts Criteria Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D
Fair
70-79% C
Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Discuss one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and identify the court that took jurisdiction. Explain why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and did not submit or incompletely identified the court that took jurisdiction. Did not submit or incompletely explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. Insufficiently discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and insufficiently identified the court that took jurisdiction. Insufficiently explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. Partially discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and partially identified the court that took jurisdiction. Partially explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. Satisfactorily discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and satisfactorily identified the court that took jurisdiction. Satisfactorily explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. Thoroughly discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and thoroughly identified the court that took jurisdiction. Thoroughly explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances. 2. Discuss the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Give your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Provide a rationale for your response.
Weight: 30%Did not submit or incompletely discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Did not submit or incompletely gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response. Insufficiently discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Insufficiently gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response. Partially discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Partially gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Partially provided a rationale for your response. Satisfactorily discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Satisfactorily gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response. Thoroughly discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Thoroughly gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response. 3. Discuss the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Explore one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Describe the resolution to the selected case. Weight: 30%
Did not submit or incompletely discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Did not submit or incompletely explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Did not submit or incompletely described the resolution to the selected case. Insufficiently discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Insufficiently explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Insufficiently described the resolution to the selected case. Partially discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Partially explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Partially described the resolution to the selected case. Satisfactorily discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Satisfactorily explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Satisfactorily described the resolution to the selected case. Thoroughly discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Thoroughly explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Thoroughly described the resolution to the selected case. 4. 3 references Weight: 5%
No references provided Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. 5. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%
More than 8 errors present 7-8 errors present 5-6 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Trials and Verdicts assignment