Points: 200

Assignment 2: Trials and Verdicts

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Discuss one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and identify the court that took jurisdiction. Explain why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and did not submit or incompletely identified the court that took jurisdiction. Did not submit or incompletely explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

Insufficiently discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and  insufficiently identified the court that took jurisdiction. Insufficiently explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

Partially discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and partially identified the court that took jurisdiction. Partially explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

Satisfactorily discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and satisfactorily identified the court that took jurisdiction. Satisfactorily explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

Thoroughly discussed one (1) real-life criminal case, taken from current events, and thoroughly identified the court that took jurisdiction. Thoroughly explained why the court that took the case was the appropriate one for the particular circumstances.

2. Discuss the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Give your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Provide a rationale for your response.
Weight: 30%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Did not submit or incompletely gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.

Insufficiently discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Insufficiently gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.

Partially discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Partially gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Partially provided a rationale for your response.

Satisfactorily discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial.  Satisfactorily gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.

Thoroughly discussed the real-life case that you have selected, in which the defendant accepted a plea bargain as an alternative to trial. Thoroughly gave your opinion on whether or not justice was served in the case in question. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response.

3. Discuss the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Explore one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Describe the resolution to the selected case.

Weight: 30%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Did not submit or incompletely explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Did not submit or incompletely described the resolution to the selected case.

Insufficiently discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Insufficiently explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Insufficiently described the resolution to the selected case.

Partially discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Partially explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Partially described the resolution to the selected case.

Satisfactorily discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Satisfactorily explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Satisfactorily described the resolution to the selected case.

Thoroughly discussed the real-life case that you selected, in which, like Roland Gary, the defendant was wrongly accused and later vindicated. Thoroughly explored one (1) key aspect of the case and examine its relation to the case at large. Thoroughly described the resolution to the selected case.

4. 3 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided

Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.

Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

5. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present

7-8 errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present