As provided for in the Constitution, the U.S. has two distinct court systems -- federal and state. Each court system has two completely separate forms of court proceedings -- criminal and civil. E. Osborne Ayscue, Jr., a civil trial attorney practicing in Charlotte, North Carolina, and the current president of the American College of Trial Lawyers, explains these distinctions which are key to an understanding of the U.S system of justice.

It was a trial that dominated the headlines for months not only in the United States, but also around the world -- the case of the state of California versus famed athlete, O. J. Simpson, on charges of first-degree murder. Americans were fascinated as they tuned in by the millions to the daily televised coverage. But viewers overseas were often confused. Why was Simpson prosecuted in state rather than federal court? Why was the defendant not required to testify? And why, after he was found not guilty, was he tried again in a civil trial where this time he was required to testify? Wasn't that double jeopardy?

The answers to these questions lie in the complex nature of the U.S. judicial system and its parallel system of federal and state courts. The U.S. Constitution assigns specific powers, including certain law-making powers, to the federal government, reserving all other powers to the states. Accordingly, there are federal courts for prosecution of violations of federal law, and state courts for violations of state law. Most crimes are violations of state law.

Even the serious crime of murder, in most cases, is a violation of state law in the United States. That is why O.J. Simpson was prosecuted by the state of California, where the crime occurred, and not in the federal courts. Simpson was not required to testify at his murder trial because he had the constitutional right not to, unless he so chose. In fact, defendants in the United States have a myriad of rights that emanate from the Constitution itself, whether or not they are prosecuted in state or federal court. Simpson would have had the same right not to testify against himself in a federal criminal trial, for example.

But how could Simpson be tried twice -- once in a criminal trial where he was found not guilty of the murders of his wife, Nicole Simpson and her friend, Ron Goldman -- and again in a civil trial where he was held responsible for their deaths and required to pay the plaintiffs? The answer is that the U.S. criminal and civil trial systems are totally separate with different penalties imposed and different rules of procedure.

In the Simpson civil trial, the defendant was required to testify and the standard of proof was lower. In the civil case, instead of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury had to find only the preponderance of evidence as to Simpson's guilt. The defendant has fewer procedural rights in a civil trial, where the result is most often limited to money damages.

Civil v. Criminal Trials

The rules for civil v. criminal trials vary somewhat in the federal and state systems, but are similar in most respects since, under the Constitution, all trials must confer specific rights to defendants, and since the rules of evidence are generally the same in both. But there are major differences in procedure for civil and criminal trials:

• Pleading. The statement of the claim or charge is more precise and detailed in a criminal case.

• Discovery. The ability of each side -- prosecution and defense -- to gather information to support their position, is more limited in a criminal case.

• Higher Burden. In a criminal trial, a defendant must be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But in a civil trial, the plaintiff and the party bringing the case must prove the claim only by the greater weight of evidence, a test, for example, the Simpson jury in the civil trial believed was met.

• Greater Protection. Because of the more severe penalties that can be imposed, a defendant in a criminal trial is accorded more procedural rights and safeguards than a defendant in a civil trial.

• Right to Appeal. If a criminal defendant is acquitted, the prosecution's right to appeal is almost nonexistent since the defendant cannot stand trial twice for the same crime. In a civil case the loser has the right to appeal.

• Speedy Trial. In jurisdictions with speedy trial laws, criminal cases may be tried more promptly than civil cases.

Criminal Trials and the Rights of Defendants

Much of the world's image of U.S. criminal trials is created by Hollywood television dramas -- from Perry Mason, who rarely if ever failed to win acquittal for his clients, to L.A. Law. These shows do not necessarily accurately reflect the basic structure of a U.S courtroom in a criminal trial. In reality, criminal trials in the U.S. are rarely as dramatic as film portrayals, and are often more ponderous and deliberate.

The judge is the manager of the trial and the final arbiter of the applicable law. The jury decides whether the prosecution has presented enough evidence to convict the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution and the defense team present their case, under the rules of procedure, in an adversary system. What is often amazing to overseas observers is the array of rights that surround a criminal defendant once he or she is accused of a crime. This is known in the United States as "due process of law." Those rights include:

• Prosecution only after a preliminary judicial procedure that finds probable cause based on credible evidence presented by the prosecution.

• Right to be brought into open court, where the charges are read to the defendant, who must then enter a guilty or not guilty plea.

• Right to counsel except in trials for minor offenses. This includes the right to a court-appointed lawyer at government expense if the defendant cannot afford one. The defendant also has the right to require the attendance of witnesses and to confront them -- through his lawyer -- at trial.

• Entitlement to a trial in open court by a jury of one's peers -- in other words, fellow citizens. In the United States, verdicts in criminal trials require a unanimous jury verdict in most jurisdictions and, unlike in other countries with jury systems, both the prosecution and the defense have a limited right to strike jurors they believe will not be fair.

• Only one trial for the same offense. This is the celebrated protection against double jeopardy that protects defendants from over-zealous prosecutors determined to eventually find a jury that will convict.

• Right against self-incrimination. In the United States, a defendant cannot be compelled to testify against himself, a right O.J. Simpson, for example, invoked in his criminal trial. If a defendant chooses to testify, however, he must answer questions from the prosecution as well as the defense.

• Competence to stand trial. A defendant must be mentally competent to understand the offenses of which he is charged.

• A speedy trial. The Constitution guarantees a speedy trial by an impartial jury in the jurisdiction where the offense was committed. The trial may, however, also be moved to another jurisdiction if it is felt that an impartial jury cannot be found.

• Pretrial Proceedings. A defendant has the right to adequate time to prepare a defense and can waive his right to a speedy trial. He also has the right to obtain any evidence in the possession of the prosecution that might prove his innocence. In addition, he has the right to interview witnesses before trial.

The Course of a Criminal Trial

A criminal trial begins with opening statements -- first by the prosecution and then by the defense. The prosecution then presents its evidence and witnesses, who are subject to cross- examination by the defense. The court -- in essence, the judge - - can dismiss the case at this stage if he believes the evidence does not prove the defendant committed the crime.

The defense then has the opportunity to present its evidence and witnesses. After the defense case has been presented, the prosecution may present rebuttal evidence. As in a civil trial, the judge supervises the proceedings and rules on disputes about admissibility of evidence. The trial ends with closing statements by both sides and deliberation by the jury, following instructions by the judge.

The jury must find the defendant guilty or not guilty on each charge. A verdict of not guilty terminates the proceedings and the defendant is freed. In the case of a defendant who is found guilty or who has pled guilty, obviating the need for a trial, the sentencing phase begins, except in death penalty cases, where the jury is required to decide between death and a lesser penalty.

The sentencing process includes a pre-sentencing investigation and the filing of a report on all matters germane to the defendant's sentence. The defendant can review and comment on that report. The defendant also has the right to counsel at his sentencing hearing. The court then enters an order, specifying the punishment imposed on the defendant and how that punishment is to be carried out. The judge imposes the sentence subject to any sentencing guidelines that may have been prescribed by law.

Significantly, all defendants in criminal trials have the right to appeal to a higher court, including in some cases, up to the U.S. Supreme Court. A trial verdict can be overturned if errors of law have occurred, or a defendant's rights have been violated. The appeals process is an integral part of the U.S. judicial system. Many defendants have had their sentences overturned or reduced by appeals courts.

One of the most famous examples of the overturning of a sentence on appeal is the case of Dr. Sam Sheppard who, in 1954, was convicted of murdering his wife. Sheppard's initial appeals, including one that went to the Supreme Court, were rejected. But in 1966, the Supreme Court overturned the verdict and ruled that Sheppard was entitled to a new trial. Later that year, he was acquitted by a new jury. Sheppard's case was big news at the time and became even more famous when it became the basis for The Fugitive, a long-running, 1960s television show. But many less famous defendants have won new trials, or had verdicts overturned as a result of the appeals process.

The Course of a Civil Trial

In civil trials, a defendant has many, but not all of the rights that would be available in a criminal trial. A civil action begins with a written statement of a plaintiff's claim and the relief he seeks, called a "complaint." The court then issues a summons, asking for a response to the complaint within a specific timeframe after the defendant receives it.

The defendant must admit or deny each allegation and present any defense. He may also assert claims against the plaintiff, a co-defendant or a person not originally part of the case. He may also move to dismiss the suit for failure to state a valid claim. He could also ask the court to dismiss the suit, claiming lack of jurisdiction over either the subject of the suit or the defendant himself. He might also suggest the plaintiff brought suit in the wrong court or that the defendant was not properly notified of the pending case.

The next phase is a broad "discovery process," which does not normally involve the court. A party seeking discovery, however, requests help from the court to compel a reluctant opponent or other person to give information. Similarly, a party from whom unreasonable discovery is sought may seek the court's protection.

Discovery may include: written questions to be answered under oath; oral deposition under oath; requests for pertinent documents; physical or mental examinations where injury is claimed; and requests to admit facts not in dispute. Before trial, either party may move for summary judgment on any issue the evidence does not support. If the case continues to trial, the court may enter a pretrial order, defining the issues to be decided by the trial and making other provisions to expedite it.

Civil cases sometimes concern grave crimes, as in the Simpson case. Often, however, they concern less serious offenses, such as landlord-tenant disputes. In some instances, third parties are sued. For example, in the case of a recent shooting in Atlanta, Georgia, in which the alleged triggerman was killed, a relative of one of his victims sued the investment company where the shootings occurred, the owners of the building, the company responsible for security there and the estate of the deceased gunman.

Civil actions are normally tried in a court open to the public before a judge and jury of six to 12 jurors chosen at random, unless the parties agree to a trial by a judge only. As in a criminal trial, the parties have the right to dismiss certain jurors. The judge manages the trial proceedings and declares the applicable law. After opening statements, the plaintiff, who has the burden of proof, offers his evidence. If the evidence does not sustain the claim, it is dismissed at this point. If the evidence is deemed sufficient, the defendant presents his case.

After both sides present their evidence, the judge may dismiss any or all claims that are not supportable. Each party is then allowed to make a closing statement, and then, the judge explains the law to the jury. If the case goes to the jury, it alone must decide what the facts are and decide the case accordingly. Majority jury verdicts, however, are allowed in more civil trials than criminal trials. In a case tried without a jury, the judge decides the case.

Civil penalties are generally much less onerous than those imposed in criminal trials. In the Simpson civil trial, for example, an $8.5 million verdict was imposed on the defendant. Although this may seem severe, it is considerably less punitive than the life prison term Simpson would have faced had he been found guilty in the criminal trial. Simpson was convicted unanimously in the civil case, but, under California law, he could have been convicted by a 9-3 decision. In the criminal trial, however, a unanimous verdict was required.

In addition to financial recoveries, civil penalties may include ordering a party to perform or refrain from a specific act or other appropriate relief. The judge may also impose court costs on the losing party. Those costs are nominal and do not ordinarily include attorneys' fees. As in criminal cases, the losing party has the right to appeal the decision.

Conclusion

The U.S. court system may seem overly complex to some foreign observers. It is an adversary system based on trial-by-jury that is by no means perfect. But it does have the advantage of being independent from government. No citizen in America goes to jail because the government wants him there. That decision is made by a jury of his peers -- his fellow citizens -- who decide the case based on impartial rules of evidence that are designed, as far as possible, to ensure that only the guilty are convicted and punished.