Court hearings

Author

Tutor

Course

Date

Introduction

Court hearings refer to gatherings within courtrooms called for the sole purpose of carrying out certain legal procedures. There are varied legal hearing types, some dealing with civil issues while others deal with criminal issues. As much as the focus and structure of court hearings may vary from one location to another, it is noteworthy that there remains some essential elements that would be applicable in almost every court thereby governing court meetings’ flow.

In most of the court hearings that I attended, preliminary court hearings referred to as arraignment were incorporated. More often than not, this court hearing’s structure allows the legal counsel to give information to the judge pertaining to the charge that has been leveled against the defendant. From this information, the judge would determine whether there evidence is sufficient to warrant holding the defendant for a full trial. In addition, it is often the case that some courts of jurisdiction will allow the defendant to either plead guilty or not guilty during the preliminary hearings. If the judge deems it fit, he or she may set a certain amount of bail for the defendant.

All the court hearings are guided by certain requirements and procedures on how the trial is to be conducted. During the trial, the prosecution counsel presents the available evidence to the judge in an effort to prove the guiltiness of the defendant. In addition, he or she presents testimonies of witnesses so as to complement the evidence provided. In the course of the trial, the defendant’s legal counsel is offered the opportunity to prove the defendant’s innocence. It is fundamentally expected that once both the defending and the prosecution counsel have presented their case, the issue at hand can be resolved, and an appropriate decision rendered. Once the trial has taken place, a court hearing referred to as a sentencing would be held.

In all the court hearings, one common denominator was the establishment of location, data and time where the hearing would be taking place. Subject to the issues pertaining to the case, the court hearing may be set quickly or scheduled for a later date so as to give both the defending and prosecuting counsel time to organize, as well as gather facts that would be crucial for presentation during the trial. It is noteworthy that the regulations guiding the court hearings differ depending on whether the court is handling criminal cases or civil cases. In fact, the only universal or common element in all court hearings is the way a decision is reached as to the date, time and place in which the court hearing will transpire.

One thing that was notable in the court hearings that I attended is the meticulous nature of the arguments. In criminal cases, it is noteworthy that the defense counsel did not aim at explaining why the defendants had carried out the acts but rather proving that the defendants were not in the place where the criminal acts took place. As much as the defense counsel had to be proactive by having some evidence that would exonerate his or her client, it is noteworthy that their position of was reactive. This is especially having in mind that they aimed at poking holes at the evidence presented by the prosecution or rather looking for loopholes. As much as the defendants are supposedly held as innocent until such a time when their guilt has been proven, the prosecution counsel always seemed to have had a notion that they were guilty already.