State & Local Government
Judicial Politics in the States
The Judicial Branch
Courts are important in U.S. due to two factors:

A. higher law notion of constitutionality




Constitution = societal contract
some institution must interpret that contract
courts have assumed that role, because they are seen as less
political
B. separation of powers



courts are largely independent of the other branches
because, they are capable of protecting themselves
in short, courts are political actors
The Creation and Organization
of the Federal Judiciary


Article III – The United States Supreme
Court
Article I – Congress has the Power to
Establish Lower Federal Courts


Federal District Court (94)
The Federal Courts of Appeals (12+1)
Federal Court Organization (simplified)


The federal courts are organized in to three tiers - like
a pyramid.
Base: Federal District Courts





Each state has at least one district court and no district
encompass more than one state.
There are 94 total district courts and about 665 judges.
These courts are presided over by federal judges who are
appointed by the president, confirmed by the senate and
hold office for life.
Each court has a minimum of two judges and a maximum
of about 27.
These courts hear about 280,000 criminal and civil cases
per year.
Federal District Court



Federal district courts have original jurisdiction
in most, but not all, federal cases. Some of
these are criminal, but many if not most cases
are civil.
Federal district courts use both grand and petite
juries and cases are argued by United States
Attorneys, who are appointed by the president
via senatorial courtesy.
Arkansas has two federal districts: Western &
Eastern.
Arkansas Federal Districts
Eastern District
Federal Courts of Appeals

11 geographic circuits, DC 12th, 13th Court
of Appeals for Federal Circuit.




Court of Appellate Jurisdiction
Hear about 40K per year
No Juries / Three Judge Panels
Written Briefs
Middle Tier: The US Court of Appeals





Cases that are adjudicated by the federal district courts may be
appealed to one of 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals.
Twelve of these courts are regional circuit courts - that is, they
hear cases from larger geographic areas known as circuits.
The Thirteenth court is in Washington D.C. and concentrates
on appeals related to civil suits against the US government.
These courts hear about 36,000 cases per year.
Cases are heard by three judges who largely work off of
written arguments known as briefs with limited oral arguments
on the part of attorneys. There are no juries, witnesses or cross
examinations.
Arkansas is located in the 8th Circuit which sits in St. Louis,
MO. The 8th Circuit hears cases for the following states:
Arkansas; Iowa; Minnesota; Missouri; Nebraska; North
Dakota; South Dakota.
Top Tier: The United States Supreme Court




The Supreme Court is both a court of original and appellate
jurisdiction.
Article III (section 2) outlines the original jurisdiction of the
court. Most important is the supreme court's role as the first
and only arbitrator of legal disputes between the states.
Article I grants Congress the power to establish appellate
jurisdiction for federal courts.
Most cases heard by the court are on appeal from the US
courts of appeals and state courts of last resort (the highest of
the state courts)- although in extraordinary circumstances the
court will hear a case directly after resolution in district court


E.g. United States vs. Nixon (1974)
The Supreme Court hears relatively few cases - approximately
150 – 200 per year out of 5000 - 7000 requests for review.
97% of requests for review are rejected on average.
Article III, Section II:
Supreme Court Jurisdiction

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made,
or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting
Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of
admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United
States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of
different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under
Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and
foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls,
and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have
original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme
Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such
Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Federal Court Jurisdiction

Federal Question jurisdiction


A case must present a question arising under the U.S.
Constitution, a federal statute, regulation, executive
order, or treaty.
Diversity of Citizenship jurisdiction


Applies only to civil suits
Case must involve parties from different
states and an amount in controversy that
exceeds $75,000
The United States Supreme
Court

How the US SC Hears Cases

Writ of Certiorari
Petition for Court to Hear the Case
 Literal meaning (request for lower court records)




Rule of Four
Exhaust the State Judiciary
Exhaust (almost always) the federal judiciary
Supreme Court:
Basic Procedures




Cases appealed from the states must meet two conditions.
First, they must have exhausted the state system. Second, they
must raise federal questions - issues of constitutional
principles, federal law, etc.
The court exercises total control over its docket and decides
what cases to hear by the rule of four
The procedures of the supreme court look much like those in
appellate courts. The nine justices hear oral arguments and
read briefs including amicus curiae briefs.
The federal government, a usual litigant in before the court, is
represented by the United States Solicitor General (Paul D.
Clement)
Basic Procedures (con’t)

Court hears oral arguments and then meets in
private meeting to vote on case.




Senority
Agenda setting
After the court decides a case by majority vote,
a majority (typically the chief justice if in the
majority or the most senior justice in the
majority) and minority opinion is written.
These serve as the guide for lower courts to
handle similar cases. Because of the principle of
Stare Decisis the majority opinion explains the
basis for subsequent rulings.
The United States Supreme
Court


How the US SC Hears Cases Continued
There are several types of opinions issued by the Courts:






per curiam - decision delivered via an opinion issued in the name
of the Court rather than specific justices. Tend to be short and
on non-controversial issues.
Majority opinion - opinion of the court
Concurring opinion - written by justice who agrees with the
majority's conclusion, but not its reasoning
Dissenting opinion - written by justice who disagrees with the
majority's conclusion
The Court generally decides cases from the bottom-up.
Amicus Curiae & likelihood of review
Courts in Perspective

How Powerful are the US Federal
Courts?


The strongest courts in the world
The weakest branch of government
Tools of the Court

Judicial Review


Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Exercise of JR


Approximately 160 Federal Statutes
Approximately 1400 State/Local Statutes
(2/3 of which date to the incorporation
era)
The Federal Courts

Article III establishes the Supreme Court. One of the major justifications
for the court is the Supremacy Clause which establishes the preeminence of
national over state law.

Congress also has the power to establish lower federal courts, and during
the first congress the United States was divided in to judicial districts for
the establishment of federal district court (there are 94 district courts in the
United States).

Basic point: the United States has the strongest court in the world.
Strongest Courts
Courts are powerful for several reasons
 A. Ability to act as a regulator



B. Ability to invoke judicial review




regularly rule on the validity of federal regulations
many regulations currently not seen as valid until upheld by the courts
declare acts of Congress or the president to be impermissible under the
Constitution
have done so about 160 times since 1803
have ruled state laws unconstitutional about 1,000 times
C. One of the most trusted institutions in government


public trust is high
even given intrepretivist vs. activist debate
Courts are Limited

stare decisis



lawyers love precedent
prefer stability offered by prior cases -- less disruption to society and to
reputation of the Court
writing in 1992 case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern
Pennsylvania vs. Casey, Justice David Souter noted, in upholding Roe:
"For two decades of economic and social development, people have
organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their
views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the
availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail....
[Whatever the premises of opposition may be, only the most
convincing justification under accepted standards of precedent could
suffice to demonstrate that a later decision overruling the first was
anything but a surrender to political pressure, and an unjustified
repudiation of the principle on which the Court staked its authority
in the first instance. So to overrule under fire in the absence of the
most compelling reason to reexamine a watershed decision would
subvert the Court's legitimacy beyond any serious question."
Limits: Justiciability


must wait for cases to come to them - reactive, not
proactive
The case must be justiciable:
1.
2.
3.
4.
there must be a real controversy - no friendly suits, no advisory
opinions (unlike many state supreme courts)
case must be ripe and not moot - other avenues (state courts,
etc.) must be exhausted, injuries real – not hypothetical, etc.
parties must have standing - they must be the ones at risk,
government must waive sovereign immunity, etc.
Case must not present a political question - court must see the
matter as one that can be solved by judges; often eliminates
political matters on which the Court has no special expertise
(e.g. conundrum of War Powers Act; Bush v. Gore)
Powers of the Court


The supreme court has the power of Judicial Review. That is, to declare
laws passed by congress an the states unconstitutional and therefore null
and void. This is what makes the courts so powerful.
Marbury v. Madison - 1803.

The election of 1800 witnessed the defeat of the federalists and the election of
democratic president Thomas Jefferson. Before leaving office Federalist
president John Adams, w/ the help of the federalist dominated legislature,
packed the judiciary with loads of federalist judges. Jefferson was furious, and
when he realized that several of the appointments had not been delivered he
order they be cancelled. One of the appointees, Wm. Marbury, asked the court
to order that the appointments be made.
Interpreting the Constitution


Built-in Flexibility?
 Elastic clause
 Reserve clause
Judicial Interpretation of the Constitution
 “It is, emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is.” – Marhsall
 Doctrine of Original Intent (Meaning): judges should
attempt to determine what the Framers intended the
provision to mean.
 Living Constitution: Meaning of constitution must
evolve to fit the spirit of the age
Textualism

Interpretivism (textualism): the proper judicial function ins
interpretation as opposed to law-making.
 Judges are guided by the “plain meaning” of the
constitutional text when it is clear.
 “"[W]hen judges test their individual notions of
'fairness' against an American tradition that is deep and
broad and continuing, it is not the tradition that is on
trial, but the judges.“ – Justice Antonin Scalia
 See “A Matter of Interpretation” for an essay on
textualism by Scalia.
Originalism


Originalism: Judges should attempt to determine the original
“meaning” or “intent” of the Founders (or Framers).
Important distinction




One theory, original intent, is the view that interpretation of a
written constitution is (or should be) consistent with what was
meant by those who drafted and ratified it.
The original meaning theory, which is closely related to textualism, is
the view that interpretation of a written constitution or law should be
based on what reasonable persons living at the time of its adoption
would have declared the ordinary meaning of the text to be.
Strict Constructionism: strict construction requires a judge to apply
the text as it is written and no further, once the meaning of the text
has been ascertained
As Scalia has said, "the Constitution, or any text, should be
interpreted [n]either strictly [n]or sloppily; it should be interpreted
reasonably";
The Living Constitution



LC: a theory of constitutional interpretation which premises that the
Constitution is, to some degree, dynamic.
As the direct counter to originalism, which centers on meaning at the time of
ratification, the theory of a "living" Constitution suggests a founding document
that remains interdependent with an evolving society.
Its proponents thus argue that societal progress must be taken into account
when interpreting key constitutional phrases.



Pragmatism: the belief that interpreting the Constitution in accordance with long outdated
views is often unacceptable as a policy matter.
Intent: the argument that the constitutional framers specifically wrote the Constitution in
broad and flexible terms to create such a dynamic, "living" document.
Al Gore: “I would look for justices of the Supreme Court who understand that
our Constitution is a living and breathing document, that it was intended by our
founders to be interpreted in the light of the constantly evolving experience of
the American people.”
Activism vs. Restraint



Activism v. Restraint: opposing philosophies of judicial
power
Judicial Restraint: theory of judicial interpretation that
encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power.
It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws
unless they are obviously unconstitutional.
 Issues of standing, mootness, ripeness, political
questions, etc. have to do with judicial restraint.
Judicial Activism: Courts are coequal participants in the
policy-making process.
 “it is far more important to be respectful to the
Constitution than to a coordinate branch of government”
William O. Douglas
The Ashwander Rules





Judicial Restraint counsels judges to avoid broad or dramatic
constitutional pronouncements.
Some of these rules can be found in Brandeis’s concurring
opinion in Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority (1936).
1.
The Court will not anticipate the constitutionality in a
friendly, non-adversarial proceeding. (Cases and Controversies)
2.
The Court does not anticipate in advance (i.e. without the
necessity for hearing) the constitutionality of a question of
Constitutional Law/interpretation. (Cases and Controversies, no
advisory opinions)
3.
The court will not formulate a rule of law broader than the
case which is before it. (Obiter Dicta going beyond the case
issues is generally frowned upon but “done” all of the time)
The Ashwander Rules




4.
If possible the Court will dispose of a case on nonconstitutional grounds (statutory interpretation is
preferred over Constitutional interpretation)
5.
The Court will not pass on the validity of a statute
on complaint of one who fails to show injury to person
or property. (This is an issue of Standing)
6.
The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality
of a statute at the instance of one who has accepted its
benefits. There is little need after all, for the ‘winner’ to
challenge the Constitutionality of the law which aids
them. (Cases and Controversies)
Whenever possible, statutes will be construed so as to
avoid a constitutional issue (Statutory interpretation)
State Courts



The vast majority of non-criminal cases in the
United States are handled in state courts, rather
than federal courts.
For example, in Colorado, in 2002, which is
typical, roughly 97% of all civil cases were filed
in state courts and 89% of the cases filed in
federal court were bankruptcies.
Essentially all probate and divorce cases are also
brought in state court, even if the parties
involved live in different states.
Forum Shopping



Often, a plaintiff can bring a matter either to state court or federal court,
because it arises under federal law, or involves a substantial monetary
dispute (in excess of $75,000 as of October 26, 2007) arising under state
law between parties that do not reside in the same state.
If a plaintiff files suit in state court in such a case, the defendant can
"remove" the case to federal court if a timely request is made to do so.
Deciding on the jurisdiction is part of litigation strategy for both plaintiff and
defendant, in which the make up of the likely juries in each court, and the
differences between federal and state court procedures figure highly. A
mere federal law defense to a claim arising under state law, however, is
generally not a basis for removing a case to federal court from state court.
Selective Incorporation






as originally written, Bill of Rights applied only to
the national government
1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no
law….”
Madison proposed language to include states
“no State shall violate the equal rights of
conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the
trial by jury in criminal cases”
but never adopted
Barron v Baltimore (1833) – Court is explicit
Selective Incorporation Cases









cruel/unusual punishment (Robinson v CA, 1962)
right to counsel (Gideon v Wainwright, 1963)
self-incrimination (Malloy v Hogan, 1964)
confront witnesses (Pointer v TX, 1965)
impartial trial (Parker v Gladden, 1966)
speedy trial (Klopfer v NC, 1967)
compel witnesses (Washington v TX, 1967)
jury trial (Duncan v LA, 1968)
double jeopardy (Benton v MD, 1969)
More on Selective Incorporation

14th Amendment (1868)



“no state shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States; nor shall any
state deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law”
did this mean Bill of Rights applies to states?
Supreme Court originally said it did not

e.g., Twining v New Jersey (1908)
Selective Incorporation (con’t)

Supreme Court begins to change in 1920s



Gitlow v NY (1925) … socialist manifesto
Supreme Court upholds conviction
(“dangerous tendency” test) … but holds that
14th amendment extends 1st amendment to
states
Near v MN (1931) … overturns prior restraint
of Saturday Press to publish “malicious,
scandalous, and defamatory” statements
Selective Incorporation Cases

since Gitlow and Near, Supreme Court has
selectively incorporated most elements of
Bill of Rights





assembly (DeJonge v OR, 1937)
religion (Cantwell v CT, 1940)
public trial (In re Oliver, 1948)
search and seizure (Wolf v CO, 1949)
exclusionary rule (Mapp v OH, 1961)

involved girlfriend of Don King
Highlight: 4th Amendment

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no
Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized.”
Fourth Amendment



Privacy – protection against unreasonable
searches & seizures through warrant
requirement
Punishment – Exclusionary Rule: evidence
gathered in violation of the Constitution cannot
be used in a trial.
Caveat – applies only to government; it does
not guarantee the right to be free from
unreasonable searches and seizures conducted
by private citizens or organizations (i.e.
“Cheaters”).
Fourth Amendment & Privacy



The 4th Amendment requires the government to
obtain a valid warrant in order to conduct a
search or a seizure.
Valid warrants must establish “probable cause” –
reasonable belief that a search or seizure would
produce contraband or reveal a criminal activity
Exceptions


Plain View
Search incident to arrest
Fourth Amendment &
Punishment


Exclusionary Rule (Weeks v. United States) –
evidence obtained through an illegal search is
“fruit of the poisoned tree” and thus cannot be
used at trial.
Exceptions:


“Good Faith” – evidence collected through a
defective warrants could be used where police
reasonably believed it to be a good warrant (United
States v. Leon)
“Inevitable Discovery” – evidence collected
illegally may be admitted at court if it can be
reasonably argued the evidence would have been
obtained legally
Highlight: Fifth Amendment
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or
otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the
land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual
service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any
person be subject for the same offense to be twice put
in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor
be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law; nor shall private property be taken for
public use, without just compensation.”
Fifth Amendment Jurisprudence


Double Jeopardy – individuals may be tried only once
for a particular offense
Self-Incrimination – protects witnesses from being
forced to incriminate themselves.


To "plead the Fifth" or to "take the Fifth" is to refuse to answer
a question because the response could form incriminating
evidence
Due Process – the principle that the government must
normally respect all of a person's legal rights instead of
just some or most of those legal rights when the
government deprives a person of life, liberty, or property


Due process embraces “fundamental fairness” & those
fundamental rights that are "implicit in ordered liberty.“
Notification of charges against you, right to be heard, etc.
Fifth Amendment & Punishment



Fifth Amendment
No self-incrimination
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)




‘Voluntary Confessions’: The Court was called upon to consider
the constitutionality of a number of instances, ruled on jointly, in
which defendants were questioned "while in custody or
otherwise deprived of [their] freedom in any significant way."
Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without
notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection
against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?
The Court held that prosecutors could not use statements
stemming from custodial interrogation of defendants unless they
demonstrated the use of procedural safeguards "effective to
secure the privilege against self-incrimination."
Miranda Rights
Fifth Amendment & Privacy


The Fifth Amendment limits the power of
eminent domain (the power of the
government to take private property for
public use) by requiring that "just
compensation" be paid if private property
is taken for public use.
What is “public use”?

Kelo v. City of New London – private property
seized for commercial use did not violate the
Fifth Amendment.
Eigth Amendment: Punishment


Eighth amendment: “Cruel & Unusual Punishment”
Furman v. Georgia



The Court's one-page per curiam opinion held that the
imposition of the death penalty in these cases constituted cruel
and unusual punishment and violated the Constitution.
However, it left the door open for states to put in place
procedural safeguards that could permit the death penalty to
pass constitutional muster.
Gregg v. Georgia

In a 7-to-2 decision, the Court held that a punishment of death
did not violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments under all
circumstances. In extreme criminal cases, such as when a
defendant has been convicted of deliberately killing another, the
careful and judicious use of the death penalty may be
appropriate if carefully employed.
Emanating Penumbras &
Privacy
Is there a right to Privacy?

Griswold v. Connecticut (1965)




“a right to privacy older then the Bill of
Rights”
Though the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the
various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras, or zones, that
establish a right to privacy.
Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, create a new
constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations.
Roe v. Wade (1973)




a “woman’s right to privacy was so fundamental it could be infringed only when
the state interest in doing so was compelling”
The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy
(recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth
Amendment.
The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first
trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third
trimesters.
As a result, the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling.
State Courts & Criminal Cases



About 91% of people in prison at any given time in the United
States were convicted in state court, rather than federal court,
including 99% of defendants sentenced to death.
Federal courts disproportionately handle white collar crimes,
immigration related crimes and drug offenses (these crimes make
up about 70% of the federal docket, but just 19% of the state court
criminal docket).
A large share of the violent crimes that are prosecuted in federal
court arise on Indian Reservations or federal property, where state
courts lack jurisdiction and tribal court jurisdiction is usually limited
to less serious offenses.
Cases in the States







Expanded Liability
Contingency Fees
Third-Party Suits
“Pain and Suffering” & “Punitive” Awards
“Joint and Several” Liability
Tort Reform
Alternative Dispute Resolution (mediation)
Arkansas Courts
Arkansas Courts & the Constitution
The Supreme Court



Arkansas became the 25th state of the United States in 1836. Under the
state's first constitution, the Arkansas Supreme Court was composed of
three judges including one Chief Justice.
The Arkansas General Assembly elected the judges. Daniel Ringo,
Townsend Dickinson, and Thomas J. Lacy were selected to serve as the first
Arkansas Supreme Court judges. Mr. Ringo became the first Chief Justice.
The state's current constitution, ratified in 1874, provided for three
Arkansas Supreme Court judges. The Arkansas Constitution of 1874 was
amended in 1924 to provide for five Arkansas Supreme Court judges.
Amendment 9 also allowed the Arkansas General Assembly to increase the
number to seven judges, which it did by Act 205 of 1925.
Arkansas S.C. Jurisdiction




The jurisdiction and power of the Arkansas Supreme Court is controlled by
Article 7, § 4 of the Arkansas Constitution.
Under this section, the Arkansas Supreme Court generally has only
appellate jurisdiction, meaning it typically hears cases that are appealed
from trial courts.
The Arkansas Supreme Court also has general superintending control over
all inferior courts of law and equity. Until 2000, Arkansas remained one of
the few states with separate courts for law (circuit court) and for equity
(chancery court).
In November, 2000, the 80th amendment to the Arkansas Constitution was
approved by the voters of Arkansas. The Circuit and Chancery Courts have
merged into Circuit Courts, and Municipal Courts have county-wide
jurisdiction and were renamed District Courts.
Arkansas Court Elections


The seven Arkansas Supreme Court judges are elected in
state-wide non-partisan races, and serve staggered
terms, such that it is unlikely all members of the court
would be replaced in one election.
In the event a member of the court fails to serve his
entire term of office, the vacancy shall be filled by
appointment by the Governor of Arkansas. Ark. Const.,
amend. 29, §1.
Arkansas Courts of Appeals




The Arkansas Court of Appeals was created in 1978 by Amendment 58 to
the Arkansas Constitution.
In 1979, the Arkansas General Assembly passed Act 208 to establish the
Arkansas Court of Appeals as authorized by the amendment and and to
provide for the selection of the first judges.
The court handed down its first opinions for publication on August 8, 1979.
Although the creation of the Arkansas Court of Appeals provided relief for
the Arkansas Supreme Court's growing docket, continued growth required
an increase in the size of the Arkansas Court of Appeals.
Legislation was adopted during the 1993 legislative session to increase the
Arkansas Court of Appeals from six to twelve members. In 1995, the
Arkansas General Assembly amended the law.
ACA




Pursuant to Act 1812 of 2003, the State of Arkansas is divided into seven
(7) districts for the election of judges to the Arkansas Court of Appeals, and
the dates of electing the judges within each of these districts is established.
Pursuant to Amendment 58, qualifications for sitting on the Arkansas Court
of Appeals are the same as those for sitting on the Arkansas Supreme
Court.
The jurisdiction of the Arkansas Court of Appeals is determined by the
Arkansas Supreme Court. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 1-2 ("Appellate jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals").
There is no right of appeal from the Arkansas Court of Appeals to the
Arkansas Supreme Court. Id. at 1-2(e). However, opinions decided by the
Arkansas Court of Appeals may be reviewed by the Arkansas Supreme
Court on application by a party to the appeal, upon certification of the
Arkansas Court of Appeals, or if the Arkansas Supreme Court decides the
case is one that should have originally been assigned to it. Id.
Circuit Courts



Arkansas Constitutional Amendment 80, having taken effect on July
1, 2001, eliminated separate courts of law and courts of equity in
Arkansas.
Circuit courts are general jurisdiction trial courts. As of January 1,
2002, circuit courts consist of five subject matter divisions:
 Criminal
 Civil
 Probate
 Domestic relations
 Juvenile
Judicial candidates for circuit judge will now run in nonpartisan
elections and are required to have been licensed attorneys in the
state for six years preceding the date of assuming office. Circuit
judges serve a six-year term.
District Courts & City Courts



District courts, formerly known as municipal courts
before passage of Amendment 80 to the Arkansas
Constitution, exercise county-wide jurisdiction over
misdemeanor cases, preliminary felony cases, and civil
cases in matters of less than $5,000.
A small claims division of district court provides a forum
in which citizens represent themselves to resolve minor
civil matters.
The city courts operate in smaller communities where
district courts do not exist and exercise city-wide
jurisdiction.
Crime & Punishment in the States

State Rankings


http://www.morganquitno.com/DANG00RANK
.htm
Arkansas Crime Stats

http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Searc
h/Crime/State/statebystaterun.cfm?stateid=4
Crime in the States


Discussion: Broken Windows Policy
Discussion: 85% Solution & Prisons