W.S. LANGE
358-40-6351
HomeWork #2
Engineering Law
EECS 491 - Professor Rockman
Lecture II - Assignment
Answer each question in one, two or three paragraphs at the most.
1. a) Describe the federal court system.
The federal court system is hierarchal with the United States Supreme Court positioned at
the top of the pyramid. The Supreme Court hears cases of its choosing which are directed
to it from the United States Courts of Appeal and from the individual state Supreme
Courts. Additionally, there are cases over which only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction
and they are those involving ambassadors, public ministers, consuls, or cases in which a
state is a party. One of the unique functions of the nine Justices in the Supreme Court is
to interpret the Constitution and statutes.
Below the Supreme Court are the thirteen Courts of Appeals established by Congress in
1891 to relieve some of the burden on the Supreme Court. These courts operate as
appellate courts consisting of three-judge panels and do not try cases but hear cases based
on perceived conflicts in the law as the facts of a case have already been determined in
lower courts.
Forming the base of the federal judicial system pyramid are the approximately 100
District Courts where actual trials are conducted. Most of the matters considered by the
District Courts involve federal statutes or conflicts between citizens of different states.
There are other courts at this level which consider specialty issues such as tax matters in
U.S. Tax Court or claims against the federal government in the U.S. Court of Claims.
b) Describe all you know about the state court system in the state where you now reside, or the
state or county of your origin, whichever you have more knowledge of.
I haven’t lived in the United States for more than twelve years and have honestly
forgotten the specific characteristics of the state court systems. As I recall, there is a
typical arrangement of municipal courts, county courts, and district courts. Many
specialty courts cover specific matters such as small claims, probate, traffic, or juvenile
offenses. A Supreme Court in each state sits at the top of the pyramid.
I currently reside in Saudi Arabia which has a far different judicial system. There are no
lawyers. The police are charged with determining the facts of a case. After the
investigation is complete, the defendant stands before the shaikh, the judge who decides
the punishment after reading the investigation report. There is no jury. In a civil dispute
between two individuals, the police again determine the facts and the plaintiff and
defendant stand before the shaikh to learn of the remedy. There is a hierarchy of judges.
All matters are first heard at the local, municipal level. If the crime or complaint is
sufficiently serious, a provincial judge will review the local judgment. The most severe
judgments, typically those requiring capital punishment, are reviewed and approved by
the King.
I am not sure that any of this is described in a basic document. I suspect that it is a system
which has evolved and is accepted, generally understood, and taken for granted. To
prepare this answer, I asked a person whom I have known for many years. He was
apprehensive about answering my questions and requested assurance that I would not
attribute this response to him. I must admit that I am a bit uneasy just writing it down and
transmitting it on the Internet. Civil rights and due process are very different here and
habeas corpus does not exist. For all these differences, it seems to work. There is a
commonly held opinion that the system does not punish innocent people and legitimacy
apparently resides in that belief.
2. Why do courts hold the following types of evidence in disfavor:
a) oral testimony as the meaning of the terms of a written contract parole evidence);
A document is considered better evidence than testimony about it as the document is
unchangeable. Oral testimony will only be allowed if the terms of a contract involve trade
jargon or are generally ambiguous. In those cases, testimony by an expert will be allowed
to clarify the meaning of the terms for the benefit of the jury.
b) hearsay testimony;
Hearsay testimony is objectionable because the person whose words are being presented
is not in courtroom to be observed by the jury, the words were not spoken under oath, and
the words cannot be subjected to cross examination. All oral testimony, as opposed to a
document, can be malleable to one degree or another. Cross examination can reduce the
uncertainty about the truth of testimony. But hearsay will only increase the uncertainty.
Hearsay about a dying declaration or a rae gestae statement may be allowed in the
absence of other evidence.
c) expression of an opinion by a fact witness.
Fact witness are expected to testify as to facts. If an opinion is required about the facts, an
expert should be requested to testify to provide the best possible opinion.
3. What is "circumstantial evidence," and discuss why it is so often used in criminal cases.
Circumstantial evidence, in contrast to direct evidence, is used to make a case by
inference. It is often used when direct evidence, such as eyewitness testimony, is
unavailable. To draw an example from current events, Timothy McVeigh was convicted
based on circumstantial evidence because there was no eyewitness testimony about him
parking the rented truck in front of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Instead, there
was evidence that he rented the truck and there was security camera footage showing him
in a nearby McDonalds restaurant on the day of the explosion.