10 replies to this topic

[goldinero]

What is "jurisdiction?" According to Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., it is "the legal right by which judges exercise their authority." Also, "it exists when court has cognizance of class of cases involved, proper parties are present, and point to be decided is within powers of court."

Although I'm no lawyer, I've heard that a court cannot try a case if it has no jurisdiction over it. In other words, a state court cannot try a federal case. But jurisdiction is also important for smaller issues.

Consider a traffic violation... a speeding ticket. Typically, this type of case is a civil one in which the State is bringing a case against the speeding driver. If I go to traffic court I could have the following conversation with the police officer in the witness chair:

Me: What is your jurisdiction?
Officer: The State.
Me: So if I wasn't in the State at the time of the alleged violation, would I be guilty?
Officer: No.
Me: Exactly what is the State, factually?

At this point, not only is it likely that the officer doesn't know the answer. It is also likely that the prosecuting attorney and/or judge will not allow him to answer. The reason is that jurisdiction is determined legally, not factually, and the officer, not a lawyer, cannot draw a legal conclusion in court.

Not only that, if he said that the State was a geographic area, it would contradict the definition of the State being used to bring a case against me in the first place. Recall that the State is bringing the case against me. How can a geographic area (the ground I'm standing on) bring a case against me?

Food for thought? I hope so.

[BuffaloHelp]

goldinero, on Jul 20 2005, 10:36 PM, said:

Me: What is your jurisdiction?
Officer: The State.
Me: So if I wasn't in the State at the time of the alleged violation, would I be guilty?
Officer: No.
Me: Exactly what is the State, factually?

How would you get a speeding ticked if you weren't in the State to begin with? The only way you cannot be in the State at the time of the violation is if your car was stolen. Your argument does not hold water.

Jurisdiction simply dictates, in your example, A State officer cannot arrest you in B State. The officer is out of his/her jurisdiction. So, if you happen to speed through New York and was chased by NY State Trooper, once you hit New Jersey the NYS Trooper cannot continue to pursuit you on the violation. However, the NYS Trooper can call NJ State Trooper to assist in apprehending you.

By the way, this forum was dedicated to

Quote

Did you discover something today or learn't something new? Tell them to others, and exchange general knowledge and information.

as stated in the description. Did you not know this already? Simply defining a definition from a dictionary isn't the format we are looking for.

[strawberrie]

Hmm... I've always thought of jurisdiction in terms of the courts. Each court has its own separate jurisdiction (though some courts may have concurrent jurisdiction), or 'territory' where it can exercise its power. But it's not exactly a geographic matter.

For example, the federal court's jurisdiction includes the Consitution, the national government, and federal laws. State courts, on the other hand, have jurisdiction over matters like divorces, criminal cases, traffic violations, and other more state oriented issues.

Eh, this is kind of hard to describe... it really is 'food for thought '>_<

[BuffaloHelp]

Yes, jurisdiction can be defined as the territory under the applicable law, which concurs with my example and your example.

[goldinero]

BuffaloHELP, on Jul 20 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

How would you get a speeding ticked if you weren't in the State to begin with? The only way you cannot be in the State at the time of the violation is if your car was stolen. Your argument does not hold water.

You are assuming that you know what "the State" is. So now ask yourself, "What is the State?" I am starting another "What is..." under that title.

BuffaloHELP, on Jul 20 2005, 08:11 PM, said:

By the way, this forum was dedicated to  as stated in the description. Did you not know this already? Simply defining a definition from a dictionary isn't the format we are looking for.

I was mearly using the dictionary definition to complement the discussion. What I have discovered that I didn't know already is that jurisdiction = control.

Cheers!

Goldinero

[BuffaloHelp]

goldinero, on Jul 22 2005, 10:03 AM, said:

You are assuming that you know what "the State" is.  So now ask yourself, "What is the State?"  I am starting another "What is..." under that title.

You are argumentative for the arguing sake. If you are going to make a case of the definition of "the state" as in the state of New York or the state of a mind, your post is redundant and revolving. When you capitalize the word, the State, under the Constitution law the applicable boundary that Federal Law recognizes that which is separated from the laws of other States. The boundaries were established accordance to the neighboring States and is recognized by the Federal court that the atlas of The United States clearly divides the boundaries. Therefore, the State you are trying to define is clearly marked by yellow dotted lines between, let's say, California and Nevada. When you have a problem with what has been observed for the past 200+ years, I suggest you protest with the United States' government.

[Saint_Michael]

well law is one thing is i don't touch but you would have to concure aome peole are known to find loops holes in the law for them use against the courts, and most of the time it does work until they find the law and change it so it won't happen again, the law is like the constitution it can be change for the better or for the worse.

[Thunder]

Isn't there a dictionary? Well thats all i got to say lol. www.encarta.com is a good dictionary source.

[unicornrose]

First off I personally think this is a valid discussion. Jurisdiction has been a subject of question for all the 200+ years that this country has been around. In a good government such things should be always under scrutiny and a government should be flexable enough to change with the times. There are laws out there in differant counties and states that do not go with the times that they just never bothered to remove from the books but are ignored or they look away when they are not done. The law in particular that comes to mind which I can not remember where it is, but the law is the one where a person has to walk in front of the car with a lantern and a bell. the Bell has to be rung so that the horses were not startled by the car. I forget the exact amount of feet or whatever that the person had to be walking in front of the car so the horse would not be startled. Obviously now we get around on cars and horses these days are used to them. There are a few places where horses are better but I digress.

Juristiction is always being questioned. Police officers visit other cities and states all the time to help with cases but are unable to do any arrests or actual investigations because they have no juristiction. Occationally there are special cases where a police officer is given special juristiction for a particular case or circumstance. Its usually granted by the state or county to said police officers. There are special laws for some circomstances too. Criminals sometimes try to get out of the country to get away with crimes but there are laws on many of our books and other countries books about criminals trying to get away. Alot of times a country will help another country catch a dangerous criminal.

Basically Juristiction has a very hazy line depending on the circumstances and the voilence of the crime.

[godglitcher]

Juristiction has to do with a crime