Scenario Jed, Herman, and Jane
Jed, Herman, and Jane live in Washington, D.C. Jed and Jane entered the local bank and took $65,000. Jed and Herman both used shotguns during the robbery, though no one was hurt. Jane drove the getaway vehicle. Two hours later, as they headed toward the Canadian border, they were stopped by the police for speeding and taken in to custody. The police determined that Jed and Jane matched the eye witness descriptions of the robbers. Jane confessed their bank robbery scheme. Jed and Herman denied their involvement. The police only recovered $25,000 in cash, but were unable to determine if there covered money was taken from the bank. The police determined that Jed was a convicted felon at the time of the armed bank robbery. The local police and FBI were involved in the investigation.
The defense attorneys for each defendant (Jed, Herman, Jane) request a continuance for four months to sift through the evidence. The prosecution objects and argues that the delay would significantly clog the court’s already heavy workload. In the alternative, the prosecution argues that if the court grants a continuance, then the prosecution should be allowed to prolong turning over the remaining discovery. The defense attorneys object and argue that this hinders their effective representation of their clients and would hinder a prompter solution. The defense attorneys further argue that their clients deserve a well prepared and thorough defense. The judge currently has trials blocked over the next 10 months and wants to try the case now.
Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:
I. Judicial Systems
A. Describe the hierarchical structure for federal, state, and local court systems. What is the primary role of each level?
B. Explain the primary differences between the federal and state levels of judicial systems. Describe the importance of having these different levels.
C. Explain the subject matter jurisdiction for federal, state, and local courts. What impact does this have on the efficiency of court systems?
D. Distinguish which court(s) would have jurisdiction in this scenario. Defend your response.
E. Determine how venue is decided upon. What are the implications of venue?
F. What would the venue be for this scenario? Defend why this venue is the most appropriate.