Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The magistrate judge's seat is not a separate court; the authority that a magistrate judge exercises is the jurisdiction of the district court itself, delegated to the magistrate judge by the district judges of the court under governing statutory authority, local rules of court, or court orders. Rather than fixing the duties of magistrate ...
Magistrate judge, in U.S. state courts, is a title used for various kinds of judges, ... Plaintiff sues for $7500 and Defendant counterclaims for $7500), in traffic ...
Magistrate judges conduct a wide range of judicial proceedings to expedite the disposition of the civil and criminal caseloads of the United States district courts. Congress set forth in the statute the powers and responsibilities that could be delegated by district court judges to magistrate judges. To achieve maximum flexibility in meeting ...
If you appear before me as a defendant, victim, law enforcement or civil litigant or attorney, you can have confidence that you will be respected and that I will be prepared to address your case ...
The main feature of the inquisitorial system in criminal justice in France, and other countries functioning along the same lines, is the function of the examining or investigating judge (juge d'instruction), also called a magistrate judge. The examining judge conducts investigations into serious crimes or complex inquiries.
They handle most traffic violations, civil disputes seeking money damages up to $25,000, landlord-tenant disputes and criminal cases in which the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor that is punishable by not more than one-year imprisonment. District Judges are elected for six-year terms and may appoint magistrates.
In these cases the magistrates form a panel with a judge. [60] A magistrate is not allowed to sit in the Crown Court on the hearing of an appeal in a matter on which they adjudicated in the magistrates' court. There is a right of appeal from magistrates' decisions on points of law to the King's Bench Divisional Court.
Rothgery v. Gillespie County, 554 U.S. 191 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a criminal defendant's initial appearance before a magistrate judge, where he learns the charge against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. [1]