Geographic Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction: Is There an Issue? Does our court system in the United States have jurisdiction issues? Yes, they do. Jurisdiction is defined as “the authority of the court to hear certain cases” (Fuller 287). There are specific types of jurisdictions that deal in different cases. Subject-matter jurisdiction deals with the “nature of a case” (287). Geographic jurisdiction deals with the “location of the offense” and hierarchical jurisdiction deals with “where the case is located in the system” (287-288). All three jurisdictions play a role in both cases of the United States v Smiley and the Loughner case.
United States v Smiley On July 24, 1862, the steamer Golden Gate set off from San Francisco to Panama. It was told that there was about $1,450,000
Which says, “that if any person…shall plunder, steal or destroy any money, goods, merchandise or other effects from or belonging to any ship or vessel or boat or raft, which shall be wrecked, lost, stranded, or cast away upon the sea, or upon any reef, shore, bank, or rocks of the sea, or in any other place within in the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States,” he “shall be deemed guilty of a felony” (Scott 302). Unfortunately, the court has to decide if the statute is agreeable to this case. Technically, the steamer was in pieces with the crew in the water and therefore, not in possession of any Americans, as they had made it to shore without their
In the case of the United States v Smiley, the jurisdiction is territorial or geographic. The whole case was based on whether or not the United States had the right to persecute Smiley based on the fact that he took treasure from a steamer that was wrecked and dismembered in the ocean. It was the location of the steamer and the condition of the steamer that decided whether there was going to be an offense against Smiley (Scott 302-304). This case only deals with geographical jurisdiction because it was about the location and not the actual subject-matter that caused a rouse out of the case.
In the Loughner case, it was more about the subject-matter jurisdiction. Loughner killed a federal judge and therefore, can be tried in a federal court. He also killed five other people and of the five, four of the murders can and is resulting in him being charged in Arizona for those murders (Audi, Koppel). This case also deals with hierarchical jurisdiction because if the federal charges go through, Loughner is looking at a real trial and that involves “the facts of the case, determin[ing] guilt, and impos[ing] a sentence” (Fuller