Assignment Students are required to observe a court proceeding and submit a five-page reflection paper on their observations. The paper must be double-spaced and written in size 12 Times New Roman font with one inch margins. Students are encouraged to attend a proceeding in front of Judge Sánchez, but may attend any criminal or civil, state or federal court proceeding. Along with a summary of the proceeding, the student should write about his observations and connect those observations to class lessons. A paper focused solely on the factual details of the proceeding will not earn credit. The purpose of this assignment is to reflect on the experience. The paper should be organized in a format that includes: 1. an introduction with a theme that grabs the reader’s attention 2. a factual background 3. a critical discussion of the issues the court is asked to decide 4. evaluation of the disputed issues of facts, the law, and the arguments of the parties 5. the student’s impressions of the proceedings 6. a conclusion that captures the themes Below is a list of questions you should consider when writing your paper. 1. What is the case about? 2. Who are the parties? 3. Where did the proceeding take place? (state or federal) 4. What happened in this case? 5. What are the parties asking the court to decide? 6. How long for the dispute to be heard in court? 7. What are arguments the plaintiff(s) or the government made to support their positions? 8. What are the arguments the defendant(s) made in opposition or in support of the counterclaims? 9. Which side did you find more persuasive? Why? 10. How did the judge react to the parties arguments? Can you tell how the judge views the case from the type or nature of the judge's questions or reactions? Was the judge skeptical of any of the arguments? Did the judge ask probing questions? 11. What was the demeanor of the judge, lawyers, parties, jury, or court officers? 12. How does the proceeding fit in our syllabus and what are some of the larger social issues the case presents? 13. After watching the proceedings, what are your impressions about the administration of justice?