Also known as: justices of the peace · JP · J.P. · magistrate · lay magistrate
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A local judicial officer with authority to issue warrants, conduct preliminary examinations, and adjudicate minor criminal and civil matters.
Officers obtained a search warrant from justice of the peace Judy Jacobs after she reviewed an affidavit describing drug activity at a residence. The warrant was later found to lack probable cause. Because the officers relied in good faith on the neutral issuance by the justice of the peace, the evidence was admitted at trial.
A detective called justice of the peace Jeffrey Jha from the scene of a burglary to request an arrest warrant. The justice placed the detective under oath by telephone, heard the facts, and issued the warrant electronically. The procedure satisfied the requirements for reliable electronic means.
Jorge Juarez appeared before a justice of the peace on a misdemeanor charge. The justice conducted the hearing. The applicability of the Federal Rules of Evidence to the proceeding was later disputed on appeal.
Jasmine Jordan was arrested in the district of the offense when no magistrate judge was available. She was brought before justice of the peace Javier Jimenez for her initial appearance. The justice conducted the proceeding and set conditions of release as permitted when a federal magistrate is unavailable.
President Adams signed commissions for several justices of the peace in the District of Columbia, including William Marbury. The commissions were not delivered before the new administration took office. The dispute over delivery reached the Supreme Court and established the power of judicial review.
In December 1801, William Marbury, Dennis Ramsay, Robert Townsend Hooe, and William Harper petitioned the Supreme Court for a rule requiring Secretary of State James Madison to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue commanding delivery of their commissions as justices of the peace in the District of Columbia. The applicants had been nominated by outgoing President John Adams. The Senate had advised and consented to the appointments. Commissions in due form were signed by the President with the seal of the United States affixed by the Secretary of State. During the proceedings the Court heard testimony from Department of State clerks Jacob Wagner and Daniel Brent, who described the preparation and handling of the commissions. Wagner recalled that two commissions had been signed but could not confirm whether those of the applicants were recorded. Brent believed Marbury's and Hooe's commissions were made out. Ramsay's was omitted by mistake. None of the Adams-signed commissions for District justices were recorded. Attorney General Levi Lincoln, who had acted as Secretary of State, testified that he had seen signed and sealed commissions but did not know whether any for the applicants were ever sent out. James Marshall's affidavit stated that on March 4, 1801, he received and later returned several commissions from the Secretary of State's office, including those for Hooe and Harper. The applicants also submitted the affidavit of Hazen Kimball confirming that commissions for Marbury and Hooe were in the office on March 3, 1801. Madison did not appear or show cause after the rule was served. The motion for the writ itself was heard in the February 1803 term.
View caseJohn Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner were arrested after officers observed them engaging in a prohibited act. They were charged and convicted before a justice of the peace under the state statute. The convictions were later challenged on constitutional grounds.
In Houston, Texas, officers of the Harris County Police Department were dispatched to a private residence in response to a reported weapons disturbance. They entered an apartment where one of the petitioners, John Geddes Lawrence, resided. The officers observed Lawrence and another man, Tyron Garner, engaging in a sexual act. The two petitioners were arrested, held in custody overnight, and charged and convicted before a Justice of the Peace. The complaints described their crime as "deviate sexual intercourse, namely anal sex, with a member of the same sex (man)." Texas Penal Code Ann. § 21.06(a) (2003) provides that a person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex. The statute defines deviate sexual intercourse as any contact between any part of the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another person, or the penetration of the genitals or the anus of another person with an object. The petitioners exercised their right to a trial de novo in Harris County Criminal Court. They challenged the statute as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and of a like provision of the Texas Constitution. Those contentions were rejected. The petitioners, having entered a plea of nolo contendere, were each fined $200 and assessed court costs of $141.25. The Court of Appeals for the Texas Fourteenth District considered the petitioners' federal constitutional arguments under both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. After hearing the case en banc the court, in a divided opinion, rejected the constitutional arguments and affirmed the convictions. The majority opinion indicates that the Court of Appeals considered our decision in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), to be controlling on the federal due process aspect of the case. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider three questions. The petitioners were adults at the time of the alleged offense. Their conduct was in private and consensual.
View caseA justice of the peace issues arrest and search warrants, conducts preliminary examinations, and handles minor criminal and traffic matters. The officer also takes sworn statements from witnesses and the accused under historical committal statutes.
A justice of the peace qualifies when sufficiently independent from law enforcement and capable of determining probable cause from facts in an affidavit. Financial interest in issuing warrants or active participation in an investigation destroys neutrality.
Supporting sources
Extensive community activities violate the rules when they take precedence over timely performance of judicial duties and produce backlogs. Routine matters may be delegated to clerks only if the justice still gives priority to court work.
Supporting sources
…cause why a mandamus should not issue commanding him to cause to be delivered to them respectively their several commissions as justices of the peace in the District of Columbia. This motion was supported by affidavits that notice had been given to Mr. Madison; that Mr. Adams, the late President, nominated the applicants to the Senate;…