Answer to Question 1
The public believes that judges are the principal decision makers in courts. Often they are not. They are constrained by the actions of other members of the courtroom work group. Although judges still retain the formal legal powers of their office, they often informally share these powers with other members of the courtroom work group. Sanctions can be applied against judges who deviate from the consensus of the courtroom work group. Judges who fail to move their docket may be transferred to less desirable duties. By no means are judges totally controlled by the courtroom work group. As the most prestigious members of the group, they can bring numerous pressures to bear on prosecutors, defense attorneys, and others.
The amount of influence judges actually exert on the other members of the courtroom work group varies. Some judges are active leaders of the courtroom work group. On the other hand, some judges have a laissez-faire attitude, allowing the attorneys as many continuances as they request. In large courts, judge shopping is a common practice. Although organizational pressures work to provide a certain degree of consistency among judges, any examination of a multi-judge court immediately shows that judges differ in terms of the sentences they hand out, the way they run their courtroom, and the number of cases they have pending. Knowledge of these judicial differences is often as necessary for the practicing attorney as mastery of the law and rules of procedure.
Answer to Question 2
True
Bayliss and Starling discovered the mechanism by which the small intestine and pancreas work togethe
Copepods, from Ernst Haeckel's 1904 work Kunstformen der Natur
ABO Blood Group
Scientists (group photo)
Relationships and dates divergence of living primate group based on molecular and DNA comparisons.
Role-Playing a Situation in Which a Patient Is from Another Culture