Legal Aspects of Criminal Justice System

gore nullification is basic everyy the situation wherein a current guilty person was given the judgment not guilty by the set of jurors or the jury itself when that person is believed to be guilty of the abomination he or she is accused of. The Jury tends to play an immoral design against his or her job which is to give justified verdict to a real wickedness and thus apply an altered decision into the accused.An manakin of a jury nullified possibility is the famous matter during the year 1735. This case is the trial case of John Peter Zenger charged by the spring Governor of the New York Colony, William Cosby. In this case, the verdict given by the Jury to Zenger is a not guilty verdict wherein all the facts where given that Zenger did all the crime which he is accused of (Institute, 1992).Another case is the case of William drop a line wherein he as the accused was acquitted by the set of juries. This happened in the year 1670 in London his case was Preaching Quakerism. D uring this period quaternary from the twelve chosen jurors made a non-guilty verdict which led them to sink time in prison and pay the damages they created but sooner they get into imprisonment, one of the judges made his plea and was able to cancel the unjust law (Institute, 1992).In the ban side of the defendant, his rights were violated because the one-sixth amendment says that a defendant should not be deprived and even ladened from his legal concerns (FindLaw, 2008). When jury nullification breathes the defendant entrust be deprived from knowing whats really happening in the court wherein the case holds his/her right to freedom. The nullification of the Jury to the case could also affect the resolve final decision about the defendant if he or she will be acquitted. Thus, the judge final judgment could henceforth be negative for the accused or the defendant because the judge whitethorn think that the defendant just influenced the Juries who suffraged for the accused pe rsons acquaintance.References FindLaw. (2008). Right to a bustling and Public Trial Electronic Version. Retrieved January 16 from http//caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment06/02.html.Legal Aspects of wrong Justice SystemFelony Disfranchisement is a process in which a convicted sad lapse his or her rights and property. It is also considered as civil death, whereby these persons would lose all rights and claim to property, including the right to vote.The felony disenfranchisement law was first enforced expressive style bear out in ancient Ro homos and Greeks. Deprivation the convicts right, confiscation of private properties and exposure to death be consequence of having a felony interpret during the earlier times. The Englishman gave birth to the disfranchisement of wrongdoers in the States.Nowadays, that three states in America continue to impose felony disfranchisement and the illegibility to vote to all citizens with a felony record which are states of Iow a, Kentucky, and Virginia. Conviction with felony record has its own consequence merely different from the felony disfranchisement carrying out in earlier times. Today, felonies dont have the right to vote, distribute on a jury or even hold a position in the government which makes them different from an ordinary people, the lowest of the citizens.The nidation of felony disfranchisement is one of the political anomalies in America or even in other countries. As we all know, voting is a not only a privilege but a right that any man wants to exercise.The United States Government eliminates constraints on voting whether by court or legislative action. The citizens convicted by felony are the only few who can not exercise their voting rights during elections (Rockville, 1986).Most of the pro disfranchisement are arguing that talent the ex-felons a right to vote may serve as a risk in the society since an election process is a substantial activity for the development of a state.Pro d isfranchisement cited some problems that may occur when a offender is given a right to cast a vote. They say that it may harm the law if changed, voter fraud may occur or the purity of ballots may be affected (cited in gay rights Watch). These reasons are some of those who make the ex-felons unrightfully voters. A good example of a convicted felon was Richardson v. Ramirez who was barred from voting without violating the Fourteenth Amendment. Richardson v. Ramirez leaves open a valid claim that the unequal enforcement of disfranchisement laws is unconstitutional.Plaintiffs argued that calcium counties different interpretations of infamous crime meant that the law was unequally applied. The U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back to the California Supreme Court to decide this issue, but before it could rule, California changed its law (Brennan 2007). A guy named Baker v. Pataki from New York City was a very good example of purposeful racial discrimination having him convicted by felon y. A mixed Afro-American Latino challenged New Yorks national court who denied the votes of several felony offenders, in prison or on parole. He said that these act is merely against the Voting Rights fiddle 1968 since it has a disproportional racial impact. The lower court however dismissed the case cogitate that the U.S Supreme court in Richardson v. Ramirez upheld the disfranchisement law. They also found that Voting Rights Act did not apply to such laws.The effect of felony disfranchisement law has been drastically implemented in the past century since in that location are increasing numbers of criminals that are sentenced by felony they are sent to prison and stay there for a long time. Voting is a right, and equal right must(prenominal) be given to a citizen even if he or she was an offender of the law. Issues in racial discrimination and human rights must take into consideration.ReferencesHuman Rights Watch and the Sentencing Project (October 1998). Losing the vote the impact of felony disenfranchisement laws in the united states. Retrieved January 17, 2008, from http//www.hrw.org/reports98/vote/Westat, Inc. (December 1986). Historical corrections statistics in the united states.