State supreme court

Last updated

In the United States, a state supreme court (known by other names in some states) is the highest court in the state judiciary of a U.S. state. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts.

Contents

Generally, a state supreme court, like most appellate tribunals, is exclusively for hearing appeals of legal issues. Although state supreme court rulings on matters of state law are final, rulings on matters of federal law (generally made under the state court's concurrent jurisdiction) can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Each state supreme court consists of a panel of judges selected by methods outlined in the state constitution. Among the most common methods for selection are gubernatorial appointment, non-partisan election, and partisan election, but the different states follow a variety of procedures.

Role and powers

Under the system of federalism established by the United States Constitution, federal courts have limited jurisdiction, and state courts handle many more cases than do federal courts. [1] Each of the fifty states has at least one supreme court that serves as the highest court in the state; two states, Texas and Oklahoma, have separate supreme courts for civil and criminal matters. The five permanently inhabited U.S. territories, as well Washington, D.C., each have comparable supreme courts. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts. State supreme courts are completely distinct from any United States federal courts located within the geographical boundaries of a state's territory, or the federal-level Supreme Court.

The exact duties and powers of the state supreme courts are established by state constitutions and state law. [2] Generally, state supreme courts, like most appellate tribunals, are exclusively for hearing appeals on decisions issued by lower courts, and do not make any finding of facts or hold trials. [3] They can, however, overrule the decisions of lower courts, remand cases to lower courts for further proceedings, and establish binding precedent for future cases. Some state supreme courts do have original jurisdiction over specific issues; for example, the Supreme Court of Virginia has original jurisdiction over cases of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, and writs of actual innocence based on DNA or other biological evidence. [4]

Jurisdiction and appellate procedure

As the highest court in the state, a state supreme court has appellate jurisdiction over all matters of state law. Many states have two or more levels of courts below the state supreme court; for example, in Pennsylvania, a case might first be heard in one of the Pennsylvania courts of common pleas, be appealed to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, and then finally be appealed to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. In other states, including Delaware, the state supreme court is the only appellate court in the state and thus has direct appellate jurisdiction over all lower courts.

Like the U.S. Supreme Court, most state supreme courts have implemented "discretionary review." Under such a system, intermediate appellate courts are entrusted with deciding the vast majority of appeals. Intermediate appellate courts generally focus on the mundane task of what appellate specialists call "error correction," [5] which means their primary task is to decide whether the record reflects that the trial court correctly applied existing law. In a few states without intermediate appellate courts, the state supreme court may operate under "mandatory review", in which it must hear all appeals from the trial courts. [6] This was the case, for example, in Nevada prior to 2014. [7] For certain categories of cases, many state supreme courts that otherwise have discretionary review operate under mandatory review, usually with regard to cases involving the interpretation of the state constitution or capital punishment. [6]

One of the informal traditions of the American legal system is that all litigants are entitled to at least one appeal after a final judgment on the merits. [8] However, appeal is merely a privilege provided by statute, court rules, or custom; [8] the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that there is no federal constitutional right to an appeal. [9]

States with unique appellate procedures

Iowa, Nevada, and Oklahoma have a unique procedure for appeals. In those states, all appeals are filed with the appropriate Supreme Court (Iowa and Nevada each have a single Supreme Court, while Oklahoma has separate civil and criminal Supreme Courts) which then keeps all cases of first impression for itself to decide. It forwards the remaining cases which deal with points of law it has already addressed to the intermediate Court of Appeals. Under this so-called "push-down" or "deflection" model of appellate procedure, the state supreme court can immediately establish final statewide precedents on important issues of first impression as soon as they arise, rather than waiting several months or years for the intermediate appellate court to make a first attempt at resolving the issue (and leaving the law uncertain in the interim).

Notably, the Supreme Court of Virginia has always operated under discretionary review for nearly all cases, but from its creation in 1985, the intermediate Court of Appeals of Virginia heard appeals as a matter of right only in family and administrative cases. After two other states adopted appeals of right in the late 2000s, this left Virginia as the only state in the Union with no first appeal of right for the vast majority of civil and criminal cases. Appellants were still free to petition for review, but such petitions were subject to severe length constraints (6,125 words or 35 pages in Virginia) and necessarily were more narrowly targeted than an opening brief in an appeal of right to an intermediate appellate court (in contrast, an appellant's opening brief to a California intermediate appellate court can run up to 14,000 words). The vast majority of decisions of Virginia circuit courts in civil and criminal cases were thereby insulated from appellate review on the merits. In March 2021, Virginia enacted a comprehensive reform package allowing for appeals of right to the Court of Appeals in civil and criminal cases. The same bill expanded the Court of Appeals from 11 to 17 judges to handle the increased workload. [10]

Relationship with federal courts and federal law

Under American federalism, a state supreme court's ruling on a matter of purely state law is final and binding and must be accepted in both state and federal courts. However, when a case involves federal statutory or constitutional law, review of state supreme court decisions may be sought by way of a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court is the only federal court that has jurisdiction over direct appeals from state court decisions, although other federal courts are sometimes allowed "collateral review" of state cases in specific situations, for example regarding individuals on death row. [11]

As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938), no part of the federal Constitution actually grants federal courts or the federal Congress the power to directly dictate the content of state law (as distinguished from creating altogether separate federal law that in a particular situation may override state law). Clause 1 of Section 2 of Article Three of the United States Constitution describes the scope of federal judicial power, but only extended it to "the Laws of the United States" and not the laws of the several or individual states. It is this silence on that latter issue that gave rise to the American distinction between state and federal common law not found in other English-speaking common law federations like Australia and Canada.

In theory, state supreme courts are bound by the precedent established by the U.S. Supreme Court as to all issues of federal law, but in practice, the Supreme Court reviews very few decisions from state courts. For example, in 2007 the Court reviewed 244 cases appealed from federal courts and only 22 from state courts. Despite the relatively small number of decisions reviewed, Professors Sara Benesh and Wendy Martinek found that state supreme courts follow precedent more closely than federal courts in the area of search and seizure and appear to follow precedent in confessions as well. [12]

Additionally, some scholars have argued that state and federal courts should judge according to different judicial theories on topics such as statutory interpretation [13] and stare decisis. [14]

Selection

Processes for selecting state supreme court judges:

.mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{}
Gubernatorial appointment, judges serve a single term
Gubernatorial appointment and re-appointment
Gubernatorial appointment, other body re-appoints
Gubernatorial appointment, followed by retention election
Legislative appointment and re-appointment
Non-partisan elections
Partisan elections
Partisan election, followed by retention election USStateSupremeCourtSelection.png
Processes for selecting state supreme court judges:
  Gubernatorial appointment, judges serve a single term
  Gubernatorial appointment and re-appointment
  Gubernatorial appointment, other body re-appoints
  Gubernatorial appointment, followed by retention election
  Legislative appointment and re-appointment
  Non-partisan elections
  Partisan elections
  Partisan election, followed by retention election

State supreme court judges are selected in a variety of ways, with the method of selection often depending on the circumstances in which the seat is filled. Under one common method, the Missouri Plan, the governor fills judicial vacancies by choosing from a list compiled by a non-partisan commission. These judges serve an interim term until they stand in a retention election, in which they win a full term if a majority of voters vote for retention. Many other states elect judges through non-partisan elections in which multiple candidates appear on the ballot without their partisan affiliation listed. Most of the remaining states base their judicial selection system on gubernatorial appointments or partisan elections, although several states use a mix of different methods. South Carolina and Virginia use a system of legislative appointment, while in Vermont, the governor makes the initial appointment of judges, but the legislature has the power to re-appoint judges to new terms. [15]

Various other factors can influence the appointment and re-appointment of state supreme court judges. Most judicial selection systems involving gubernatorial appointment make use of a nominating commission to recommend a list of candidates from which the governor must choose, but a minority of states allow the governor to nominate candidates even if they were not recommended by the commission. Many of the states that use gubernatorial appointment require the appointment to be confirmed by the state legislature or some other body, such as the Massachusetts Governor's Council. Although most states limit judicial terms to a set number of years, judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire serve until they reach a mandatory retirement limit, while in Rhode Island, judges serve lifetime appointments. Most judges represent the entire state, but in Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Mississippi, judges represent districts of the state. Many states, including some states in which the governor is not otherwise involved in the appointment process, allow the governor to make interim appointments to fill judicial vacancies. [15]

In many states with judicial elections, political contributions from groups such as trade associations and political action committees are allowed. [16]

Removal

The various states provide different methods for the removal of state supreme court judges during their terms, with many states providing multiple methods. Two common methods of removal are impeachment by the state legislature, and removal by state judicial boards or commissions. Other states provide for the removal of judges through recall elections, court action, gubernatorial action (with legislative consent), or through a resolution passed by a super-majority in both houses of the state legislature. [17]

Location

Traditionally, state supreme courts are headquartered in the capital cities of their respective states, [18] though they may occasionally hold oral arguments elsewhere. The six main exceptions are:

As for the court's actual facilities, a state supreme court may be housed in the state capitol, in a nearby state office building shared with other courts or state executive branch agencies, or in a small courthouse reserved for its exclusive use. State supreme courts normally require a courtroom for oral argument, private chambers for all justices, a conference room, offices for law clerks and other support staff, a law library, and a lobby with a filing window where the court clerk can accept filings and release new decisions in the form of "slip opinions" (that is, in looseleaf format held together only by a staple).

Terminology

Because state supreme courts generally hear only appeals, some courts have names which directly indicate their function in the state of New York and in the District of Columbia, the highest court is called the "Court of Appeals". [lower-alpha 5] In New York, the "Supreme Court" is the trial court of general unlimited jurisdiction and the intermediate appellate court is called the "Supreme CourtAppellate Division".

West Virginia mixes the two; its highest court is called the "Supreme Court of Appeals".

Other states' supreme courts have used the term "Appeals": Pennsylvania's court of last resort from 1780-1808; New Jersey's supreme courts under the 1844 constitution; and Delaware's supreme court were all called the "Court of Errors and Appeals". The term "Errors" refers to the now-obsolete writ of error, which was used by state supreme courts to correct certain types of egregious errors committed by lower courts.

Massachusetts and New Hampshire originally named their highest courts the "Superior Court of Judicature." Since 1780, Massachusetts has used the name "Supreme Judicial Court" (to distinguish itself from the state legislature, which is called the Massachusetts General Court); New Hampshire uses the name "Supreme Court". Additionally the highest court in Maine is named the "Supreme Judicial Court". This similar terminology is probably a holdover from the time when Maine was part of Massachusetts. In Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York, the highest courts formerly used variations of the term "Court of Errors," which indicated that the court's primary purpose was to correct the errors of lower courts. [22] [23] [24] [25]

List of state and territorial supreme courts

States

Name and stateMode of selection [26] [lower-alpha 6] Term
(Years) [26]
Retirement age [26] Number of
members [27]
Partisan breakdown [lower-alpha 7]
Supreme Court of Alabama Partisan election67099R–0D
Alaska Supreme Court Missouri Plan 107054R–1I
Arizona Supreme Court Missouri Plan67077R–0D
Arkansas Supreme Court Non-partisan election87
Supreme Court of California Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the California Commission on Judicial Appointments1276D–1R
Colorado Supreme Court Missouri Plan107277D–0R
Connecticut Supreme Court Missouri Plan87077D–0R
Delaware Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Delaware Senate 1253D–2R
Supreme Court of Florida Missouri Plan67577R–0D
Supreme Court of Georgia Non-partisan election698R–1I
Supreme Court of Hawaii Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Hawaii State Senate 107054D–1R
Idaho Supreme Court Non-partisan election654R–1I
Supreme Court of Illinois Partisan election10 [28] 75D–2R
Indiana Supreme Court Missouri Plan107555R–0D
Iowa Supreme Court Missouri Plan87277R–0D
Kansas Supreme Court Missouri Plan67575D–2R
Kentucky Supreme Court Non-partisan election87
Louisiana Supreme Court Partisan election107075R–1D–1I
Maine Supreme Judicial Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Maine Senate 777D–0R
Supreme Court of Maryland Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Maryland Senate 107076R–1D
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Massachusetts Governor's Council Life7075R–2D
Michigan Supreme Court Semipartisan election87074D–3R
Minnesota Supreme Court Non-partisan election67077D–0R
Supreme Court of Mississippi Non-partisan election89
Supreme Court of Missouri Missouri Plan127075R–2D
Montana Supreme Court Non-partisan election87
Nebraska Supreme Court Missouri Plan676R–1D
Supreme Court of Nevada Non-partisan election67
New Hampshire Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Executive Council of New Hampshire Life7054R–1D
Supreme Court of New Jersey Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the New Jersey Senate 7, then until 707074D–3R
New Mexico Supreme Court Appointment by governor855D–0R
New York Court of Appeals Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the New York State Senate 147077D–0R
North Carolina Supreme Court Partisan election87275R–2D
North Dakota Supreme Court Non-partisan election1054R–1I
Supreme Court of Ohio Partisan election67074R–3D
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
Missouri Plan69
5
5R–4D
4R–1D
Oregon Supreme Court Non-partisan election67577D–0R
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Partisan election107575D–2R
Rhode Island Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of both chambers of the Rhode Island General Assembly Life53R–2D
South Carolina Supreme Court Appointment by South Carolina General Assembly 10725
South Dakota Supreme Court Missouri Plan87055R–0D
Tennessee Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of both chambers of the Tennessee General Assembly 855R–0D
Supreme Court of Texas
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Partisan election6749
9
9R–0D
9R–0D
Utah Supreme Court Missouri Plan107555R–0D
Vermont Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the advice and consent of the Vermont Senate 69054R–1D
Supreme Court of Virginia Appointment by Virginia Senate with the advice and consent of the Virginia House of Delegates 12707
Washington Supreme Court Non-partisan election67595D–4I
Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia Non-partisan election1253R–1D–1I
Wisconsin Supreme Court Non-partisan election107
Wyoming Supreme Court Missouri Plan87055R–0D

Territories and federal district

Name and territory or federal districtMode of selectionTerm
(Years)
Number of
members
Retirement age
High Court of American Samoa Appointment by the United States Secretary of the Interior (Justices) & appointment by the Governor of American Samoa (Judges)During good behavior8 (2 + 6)
District of Columbia Court of Appeals Appointment by the president of the United States with the advice and consent of the United States Senate 15974
Supreme Court of Guam Appointment by governor with the confirmation of the Legislature of Guam During good behavior, subject to a retention election every ten years after his or her appointment3
Northern Mariana Islands Supreme Court Appointment by governor with the confirmation of the Senate of the Northern Mariana Islands 83
Supreme Court of Puerto Rico Appointment by governor with the confirmation of the Senate of Puerto Rico Mandatory retirement at age 709
Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands Appointment by governor with the confirmation of the Legislature of the Virgin Islands Initial 10, with a term of good behavior upon reconfirmation3

Tribal supreme courts

See also

Notes

  1. Massachusetts and New Hampshire have mandatory retirement ages, while Rhode Island has life tenure.
  2. In Hawaii, a judicial commission re-appoints judges, while in Vermont, the legislature re-appoints judges.
  3. Many, though not all, of the states in this category use the Missouri Plan. In New Mexico, judges are initially appointed by the governor, then face a partisan election; after that initial partisan election, judges win new terms through retention elections.
  4. Montana makes use of non-partisan retention elections at the end of a judge's term.
  5. This was also formerly the case in Maryland. Maryland's jury trial courts are called "Circuit Courts" (non-jury trials are usually conducted by the "District Courts," whose decisions may be appealed to the Circuit Courts), and its intermediate appellate court was formerly called the "Court of Special Appeals". In the 2022 general election held on November 8, 2022, voters approved a constitutional amendment to change the name of the court to the "Supreme Court of Maryland", and the title of its judges to "Justice." The name of the intermediate appellate court was changed to the Appellate Court of Maryland. [19] [20] It became effective on December 14, 2022. [21]
  6. Refers only to the initial method of appointing a judge at the start of a new term.
  7. Partisanship reflects the parties of the appointing governors, except in cases where a judge is registered with another party.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Appellate court</span> Court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal

An appellate court, commonly called a court of appeal(s), appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In much of the world, court systems are divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts, often on a discretionary basis. A particular court system's supreme court is its highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate under varying rules.

In the United States, a state court has jurisdiction over disputes with some connection to a U.S. state. State courts handle the vast majority of civil and criminal cases in the United States; the United States federal courts are far smaller in terms of both personnel and caseload, and handle different types of cases. States often provide their trial courts with general jurisdiction and state trial courts regularly have concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and their subject-matter jurisdiction arises only under federal law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States courts of appeals</span> Post-1891 U.S. appellate circuit courts

The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal judiciary. They hear appeals of cases from the United States district courts and some U.S. administrative agencies, and their decisions can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. The courts of appeals are divided into 13 "Circuits". Eleven of the circuits are numbered "First" through "Eleventh" and cover geographic areas of the United States and hear appeals from the U.S. district courts within their borders. The District of Columbia Circuit covers only Washington, DC. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from federal courts across the United States in cases involving certain specialized areas of law.

In law, certiorari is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. Certiorari comes from the name of an English prerogative writ, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of the lower court be sent to the superior court for review. The term is Latin for "to be made more certain", and comes from the opening line of such writs, which traditionally began with the Latin words "Certiorari volumus...".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Maryland</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Maryland

The Supreme Court of Maryland is the highest court of the U.S. state of Maryland. The court, which is composed of one chief justice and six associate justices, meets in the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building in the state capital, Annapolis. The term of the Court begins the second Monday of September. The Court is unique among American courts in that the justices wear red robes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government of Maryland</span> State government of the United States

The government of Maryland is conducted according to the Maryland Constitution. The United States is a federation; consequently, the government of Maryland, like the other 49 state governments, has exclusive authority over matters that lie entirely within the state's borders, except as limited by the Constitution of the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Florida</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Florida

The Supreme Court of Florida is the highest court in the U.S. state of Florida. It consists of seven justices—one of whom serves as Chief Justice. Six members are chosen from six districts around the state to foster geographic diversity, and one is selected at large.

The federal judiciary of the United States is one of the three branches of the federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government. The U.S. federal judiciary consists primarily of the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts. It also includes a variety of other lesser federal tribunals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Nevada</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Nevada

The Supreme Court of Nevada is the highest state court of the U.S. state of Nevada, and the head of the Nevada Judiciary. The main constitutional function of the Supreme Court is to review appeals made directly from the decisions of the district courts. The Supreme Court does not pursue fact-finding by conducting trials, but rather determines whether legal errors were committed in the rendering of the lower court's decision. While the Court must consider all cases filed, it has the discretion to send appeals to the Nevada Court of Appeals for final resolution, as well as the power to determine the jurisdiction of that court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Texas</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Texas for civil appeals

The Supreme Court of Texas is the court of last resort for civil matters in the U.S. state of Texas. A different court, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, is the court of last resort in criminal matters.

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia is the state supreme court of the state of West Virginia, the highest of West Virginia's state courts. The court sits primarily at the West Virginia State Capitol in Charleston, although from 1873 to 1915, it was also required by state law to hold sessions in Charles Town in the state's Eastern Panhandle. The court also holds special sittings at various locations across the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Appellate Court of Maryland</span> Marylands intermediate appellate court

The Appellate Court of Maryland is the intermediate appellate court for the U.S. state of Maryland. The Appellate Court of Maryland was created in 1966 in response to the rapidly growing caseload in the Supreme Court of Maryland. Like the state's highest court, the tribunal meets in the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building in the state capital, Annapolis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review in the United States</span> Power of courts to review laws

In the United States, judicial review is the legal power of a court to determine if a statute, treaty, or administrative regulation contradicts or violates the provisions of existing law, a State Constitution, or ultimately the United States Constitution. While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define the power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">New Mexico Supreme Court</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of New Mexico

The New Mexico Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of New Mexico. It is established and its powers defined by Article VI of the New Mexico Constitution. It is primarily an appellate court which reviews civil and criminal decisions of New Mexico's trial courts of general jurisdiction and certain specialized legislative courts, only having original jurisdiction in a limited number of actions. It currently resides in the New Mexico Supreme Court Building in Santa Fe.

The Judiciary of Colorado is established and authorized by Article VI of the Colorado Constitution as well as the law of Colorado. The various courts include the Colorado Supreme Court, Colorado Court of Appeals, Colorado district courts, Colorado county courts, Colorado water courts, and municipal courts. The administration of the state judicial system is the responsibility of the Chief Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court as its executive head and is assisted by several other commissions. In Denver, the county and municipal courts are integrated and administratively separate from the state court system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals</span> Intermediate appellate court of Oklahoma

The Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals is an intermediate appellate court in the state of Oklahoma. Cases are assigned to it by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, the state's highest court for civil matters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mississippi Court of Appeals</span> Intermediate appellate court of Mississippi

The Mississippi Court of Appeals is the intermediate-level appellate court for the state of Mississippi. A creation of the Mississippi Legislature, the court began operations in 1995 for the purpose of relieving a backlog of cases before the Supreme Court of Mississippi.

In law, an appeal is the process in which cases are reviewed by a higher authority, where parties request a formal change to an official decision. Appeals function both as a process for error correction as well as a process of clarifying and interpreting law. Although appellate courts have existed for thousands of years, common law countries did not incorporate an affirmative right to appeal into their jurisprudence until the 19th century.

The Judiciary of California or the Judicial Branch of California is defined under the California Constitution as holding the judicial power of the state of California which is vested in the Supreme Court, the Courts of Appeal and the Superior Courts. The judiciary has a hierarchical structure with the California Supreme Court at the top, California Courts of Appeal as the primary appellate courts, and the California Superior Courts as the primary trial courts.

The judiciary of Michigan is defined under the Michigan Constitution, law, and regulations as part of the Government of Michigan. The court system consists of the Michigan Supreme Court, the Michigan Court of Appeals as the intermediate appellate court, the circuit courts and district courts as the two primary trial courts, and several administrative courts and specialized courts. The Supreme Court administers all the courts. The Michigan Supreme Court consists of seven members who are elected on non-partisan ballots for staggered eight-year terms, while state appellate court judges are elected to terms of six years and vacancies are filled by an appointment by the governor, and circuit court and district court judges are elected to terms of six years.

References

  1. "Federal vs. State Courts - Key Differences". FindLaw.
  2. "Comparing Federal & State Courts". United States Courts. Retrieved July 24, 2020.
  3. Walston-Dunham, Beth (2012). Introduction to Law (6th ed.). Clifton Park: Delmar. p. 35. ISBN   9781133707981 . Retrieved November 26, 2020.
  4. "Article VI, Section 1". Constitution of Virginia. 1970. Retrieved September 16, 2013.
  5. McKenna, Judith A. (December 1994). Structural and Other Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals. Washington, D.C.: Federal Judicial Center. p. 7. ISBN   9780788115752 . Retrieved December 11, 2021.
  6. 1 2 Manweller, Mathew (2006). "Chapter 2, The Roles, Functions, and Powers of State Courts". In Hogan, Sean O. (ed.). The Judicial Branch of State Government: People, Process, and Politics. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. pp. 37–96. ISBN   9781851097517 . Retrieved October 5, 2020.
  7. Valerie Miller, "Judges renew their call for appeals court," Las Vegas Business Press 19, no. 3 (January 21, 2002): 1.
  8. 1 2 Oakley, John B.; Amar, Vikram D. (2009). American Civil Procedure: A Guide to Civil Adjudication in US Courts. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International. p. 28. ISBN   9789041128720.
  9. Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259, 270 n.5 (2000) ("[t]he Constitution does not . . . require states to create appellate review in the first place"); M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 110 (1996) ("the Federal Constitution guarantees no right to appellate review").
  10. Oliver, Ned (March 8, 2021). "Virginia Court of Appeals set to get six new judges after lawmakers agree to expansion". Virginia Mercury.
  11. 🖉 "Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989)". Justia Law.
  12. Sara C. Benesh and Wendy L. Martinek, "Context and Compliance: A Comparison of State Supreme Courts and the Circuits" 93 Marq. L. Rev. 795 (2009).
  13. 🖉Pojanowski, Jeffrey A. (February 25, 2013). "Statutes in Common Law Courts" via papers.ssrn.com.
  14. Zachary B. Pohlman, Stare Decisis and the Supreme Court(s): What States Can Learn from Gamble, 95 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1731 (2020), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3525188
  15. 1 2 "Judicial Selection: Significant Figures". Brennan Center. May 8, 2015.
  16. Big Business Taking over State Supreme Courts: How Campaign Contributions to Judges Tip the Scales Against Individuals. AmericanProgress.org.
  17. "Removal of Judges". National Center for State Courts. Retrieved July 23, 2020.
  18. Edwards, Linda L.; Edwards, J. Stanley (2002). Introduction to Paralegal Studies and the Law: A Practical Approach. Albany, NY: Delmar. p. 124. ISBN   9780766835894 . Retrieved December 23, 2015.
  19. Munro, Dana; Opilo, Emily (November 9, 2022). "Maryland to require legislators to live in their districts; state will rename its high court". The Baltimore Sun . Retrieved November 9, 2022.
  20. "Election Day was a "Namechanger": Voters Successfully Rename Maryland's Appellate Courts". November 13, 2022.
  21. Lash, Steve (November 29, 2022). "Maryland's appellate courts will get new names Dec. 14". The Daily Record . Retrieved December 14, 2022.
  22. "Appellate Division - Second Judicial Department". www.nycourts.gov. Retrieved November 15, 2023.
  23. Orfield, Lester B. (March 1942). "APPELLATE PROCEDURE IN EQUITY CASES: A GUIDE FOR APPEALS AT LAW". University of Pennsylvania Law Review : 19.
  24. Swindler, William F. (March 1976). "Seedtime of an American Judiciary: From Independence to the Constitution". William & Mary Law Review . 17 (3): 9.
  25. "The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania" (PDF). 2022. Retrieved November 15, 2023.
  26. 1 2 3 "Judicial Selection: An Interactive Map". Brennan Center. Retrieved July 23, 2020.
  27. "Methods of Judicial Selection". National Center for State Courts. Retrieved July 23, 2020.
  28. Journal, A. B. A. "Top Illinois Court Axes Mandatory Retirement Law for State Judges". ABA Journal. Retrieved October 25, 2023.
  29. "EBCI Tribal Court website".