In states without intermediate appellate courts, state supreme courts have which level of control over their dockets?

The correct answer is that state supreme courts in states without intermediate appellate courts have complete discretion over their cases. This means they can choose which cases to hear and which to decline. In such jurisdictions, individuals who wish to appeal decisions from lower courts typically do not have an automatic right to have their cases heard by the supreme court; instead, the court exercises its discretion to select cases based on legal significance, conflicts in the law, or other relevant criteria.

This level of control allows state supreme courts to manage their docket effectively, ensuring they allocate their resources to cases that have the greatest importance or that will have the widest impact on the law. In the absence of intermediate appellate courts, the supreme court serves as the highest authority, and its decisions can set legal precedents and resolve questions of law that affect the entire state.

The other options do not accurately reflect the nature of a supreme court's authority in these states. For instance, the notion that the court has no power to choose cases is inaccurate, as it undermines the role of the supreme court in interpreting law and its ability to exercise discretion in case selection. Similarly, limiting the court's jurisdiction to only civil or only criminal cases does not reflect its broader mandate to hear various types of cases, including