Preview

Donny Love Case Study

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
253 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Donny Love Case Study
The case I would like to discuss is about Donny Love. On May 4, 2008, Love bombed the Edward J. Schwartz courthouse located in San Diego, California. "On June 6, 2011, Donny love was found guilty by a federal jury of ten criminal charges, including the use of a weapon of mass destruction,"(Schmalleger, 2016 p.208) for bombing the Courthouse. On his first appearance in court, the charges against him were read to him and was given the chance to take a lawyer. "According to the procedural rules of all jurisdictions, defendants who have been taken into custody must be offered an in-court appearance before a magistrate "without unnecessary delay" (Schmalleger, 2016 p. 220). The defendant was found with so much
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    WK 3 Individual COURTROOM WORKGROUP
    • 1708 Words
    • 7 Pages

    WK 3 Individual COURTROOM WORKGROUP

    One of the important roles a judge, a criminal prosecutor, and a criminal defense attorney will carry out is called, a “courtroom work group”. The courtroom work group interact on a daily basis by these three entities joining together to converse over matters such as if the case has probable cause to convict the offender or whether or not if there is enough evidence to go forward with a criminal trial. Normally, the prosecutor will try to persuade the defense that they do not have a case or try to talk the defense into a guilty plea or possible bail. In other words, anything they can do to speed up the process with various types of negotiations. The judge has to remain ethical and fair to see both sides of the prosecution and defense to determine if the negotiations are valid enough to go through with. Even though the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney are the main officials of the courtroom work group, we cannot forget about other members that play a part as well. The minor (respectfully) members or other members that make up a courtroom work group are the court clerk, the bailiff, and the court reporter. The court clerk upholds all the records while the court reporter makes sure he/she transcribes the official proceedings. The bailiff helps to keep court order throughout a trial. Although I can understand how the main officers discuss the case and try to solve it without a trial, I feel that every case should be heard. The major problem with this though is time and money. In order for every offender to have a case without the prosecutor trying to convince the defense into something else, there would have to be a lot more courthouses with a lot more main officers. The only way this would ever happen is to hike up the taxes and no one wants their taxes to increase.…

    • 1708 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona
    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona

    * The second Defendant, Michael Vignera, was arrested for robbery. Mr. Vignera orally admitted to the robbery to the first officer after the arrest, and he was held in detention for eight hours before he made an admission to an assistant district attorney. There was no evidence that he was notified of his Fifth Amendment constitutional rights.…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Right to Speedy Trial for Traffic Violations in New York
    • 369 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Right to Speedy Trial for Traffic Violations in New York

    In answer to the defendant's assertion in his affidavit of errors that his constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated, the return of the court merely asserted that the right to a speedy trial did not apply to a traffic infraction. This assertion is incorrect, since the constitutional right to a speedy trial applies to all prosecutions (People v Wertheimer, NYLJ, June 5, 1986, at 15, col 5 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists]). Although a constitutional speedy trial claim is not waived by a guilty plea, it must be asserted in the court below in order to preserve the issue for appellate review as a matter of law (People v Jordan, 62 N.Y.2d 825; People v Blakely, 34 N.Y.2d 311). In view of the failure of the return to give any factual data regarding defendant's claim, it cannot be known for certain whether defendant made any motion to dismiss on this ground. Even it he did not, however, it is our opinion, in view of his pro se status, that the matter should be reviewed in the interests of justice (CPL 170.40; People v Williams, 151 A.D.2d 795, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 744; People v Walker, 141 A.D.2d 991, 992, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 962). In doing so, we conclude that an unexplained delay of over two years in bringing a simple traffic…

    • 369 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case Study Lennie Small
    • 74 Words
    • 1 Page

    Case Study Lennie Small

    One condition I think Lennie Small could have is Autism. People with autism have symptoms such as difficulty in social interaction with others, verbal and non-verbal communication problems and repetitive behaviors. Autism also takes place in very early brain development. It mentions that Lennie had been like 'that' since birth. Even later in life when Lennie is with the guys, he has trouble communicating properly with the owner and boss of the new workplace.…

    • 74 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Cja 354 Insanity Defense Paper
    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Cja 354 Insanity Defense Paper

    We believe that the defendant may not be competent to stand trial, due to the fact that he had has emotionally and mental issues. The defendant has no knowledge of the crime or its consequences, if put on the stand he may revert back to that emotional state of mind and will not be able to give and accurate statement and will not be able to understand charges and sentencing.…

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona
    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona

    By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.” The Court also held that “without proper safeguards, the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would otherwise do so freely.” Therefore, a defendant “must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.” As those reasons, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Arizona in Miranda, reversed the judgment of the New York Court of Appeals in Vignera, reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Westover, and affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in Stewart.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Rights And Duties In The Hollywood Film Run Away Jury
    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Rights And Duties In The Hollywood Film Run Away Jury

    Those that have not been exposed to a jury trial might be rather shocked how to process works, not only in criminal matters but also in civil matters as in the case…

    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Courtroom Workgroup Paper: American Criminal Justice System
    • 1388 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Courtroom Workgroup Paper: American Criminal Justice System

    The American Criminal Justice System is a well orchestrated and cooperative performance with the professional courtroom actors and others all playing their parts in the administration of justice. This paper will look at a very important group of individuals the courtroom work group. Each person acts as one of the cogs in the machine, all cooperating to reach a common goal. This paper will describe what a courtroom work group is, who is in a courtroom work group and what they each do. The role of the prosecutor will also be described and how they determine which cases to pursue, and what would happen if the criteria for the prosecution of cases were more lenient or stringent. Lastly, this paper will describe the effects of the criminal justice funnel and the backlog of cases on the American court systems and the courtroom work group. Are there any solutions to help eliminate the funnel and help reduce the backlog of cases? To get an answer to that question, a review of the how this important group works will have to be understood.…

    • 1388 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Court Case: The Sandoval Case
    • 1340 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Court Case: The Sandoval Case

    Every case starts with an alleged crime. In the Sandoval case, the crime was murder. Sandoval was soon put into the system after he was arrested. After the arrest, Sandoval would have been book and then gone to his first appearance hearing where he is informed that he was getting charged with first-degree murder. Next would be the preliminary hearing where the defense would have received an arraignment, formally charging the suspect of the crime and asking what his plea is. Some states do not have a preliminary hearing system so they would use a grand jury system. The defendant can plea guilty, not guilty or no contest. The prosecution must establish probable cause to the judge by showing that a crime occurred and that the accused cause that…

    • 1340 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    In Re Gault
    • 324 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In Re Gault

    On the morning of June 8, 1964, the sheriff of Gila County, Arizona took into custody one Gerald Gault, without notifying his parents, after his neighbor, Mrs. Ora Cook, reported receiving a offense and inappropriate phone call from the 15 year old boy. Once his mother found out where he was, the county’s Children’s Detention Home, she was not permitted to take him home. According to Gault, it was his friend Ronald Lewis who made the phone call and once Gault heard Lewis talking on the phone in such a matter he took the phone from Lewis, hung it up, and sent him out the door. Gault was not informed of his charges, he was not given the option to an attorney, he was also not given the opportunity to question of even face his accuser. Once Gault was released from the Detention Center, the Dean center his mother a notification informing her when Gault’s hearing would be. At the hearing, Judge McGhee ruled that the boys behavior was that of an delinquent child and was sentenced to 6 years in a juvenile detention center. After receiving this sentence, his mother went to the Arizona supreme court which “vigorously cross-examined McGhee’s actions. He justified his actions by providing the 2 reasons and their basis as to why the boy was ruled delinquent. The supreme court upheld him, and her appeal, denied. She then went to the supreme court for help. She stated that Gault was not informed of his charges nor was he told of his rights to counsel, to confront the accuser, or to remain silent. She also said that she was not properly informed of the boy’s hearing and the fact that the court admitted a “unsworn hearsay testimony” and did not keep any records of the proceedings. The supreme court ruled 8-1 in Gault’s favor, stating that this was a clear violation of Gerald Gault’s 6th Amendment…

    • 324 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Courtroom Participants' Professional Standards
    • 1215 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Courtroom Participants' Professional Standards

    In Virginia State, Jay Lentz was convicted by a jury in July 2003 for the kidnapping and murder of his wife. The jury recommended that Mr. Lentz spend life in prison; however, the United States District Judge Gerald Lee dismissed the kidnapping charge due to lack of evidence. Two weeks after the judge convicted Mr. Lentz of murder, he found evidence of prosecutorial misconduct therefore the judge ordered a new trial for the alleged murder charge.…

    • 1215 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay
    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    In the Supreme Court, case Miranda v. Arizona involved an individual by the name of Ernesto Miranda and the state of Arizona. Ernesto Miranda who was accused of kidnapping and raping women was arrested by police and questioned for about two hours until policed obtain a written statement confession to the crimes (Miranda v. Arizona). In trial, the police officers admitted they did not notifying Miranda of his right to have an attorney present when being questioned about the chargers; however, Miranda was convicted by the Arizona state court and sentenced to prison. Miranda’s attorney appealed the conviction to the Supreme Court of Arizona, but the court upheld the state’s decision stating that “Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel” (Miranda v. Arizona).…

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Courtroom Standards Analysis Paper
    • 1288 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Courtroom Standards Analysis Paper

    The United State’s Criminal Justice system allows people to be put to a fair trial within a court of law. This means that everyone has the right to be tried for the crimes that he or she is being charged with and has the right to an unbiased trial. Though everyone has this right, many people do not know how the trial process works, or do not know what the courtroom personnel do. The purpose of this paper is to explain how the major personnel of the courtroom work and the rolls and responsibilities of each person.…

    • 1288 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Courtroom work group week 3
    • 1422 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Courtroom work group week 3

    There are many parts of the courtroom work group professionals who successfully pursuit justice and the process of convicting a criminal. The courtroom work group has a major role in convicting and finalizing a case. In the courtroom work group, there are three groups of people that hold the entire courtroom together. Without the work group, the courtroom would not flow, and coming to a conclusion to the case would not be as easy. The work group is made up of the Judge, the Defense Attorney, Public Defender, Court Recorders, and the Prosecutor Attorney. Which all are part of the courtroom work group which they work together to reach a decision, in the case by interacting among themselves and who’s involved an implicit recognition and rule of civility, cooperation, and sharing their goals. There are many roles in the work group, and if they are not all followed through with then the results could be different than what they should be. In this paper, we will look at the roles of the prosecutor, how the criminal justice funnel effects the courtroom work group and what will help eliminate the funnel and reduce the backlog of cases.…

    • 1422 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Pretrial Detention
    • 2311 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Pretrial Detention

    When a crime is allegedly committed an individual can be taken into custody, after the arraignment which is the formal reading of a criminal complaint in the presence of the defandant to inform the defendant of the charges against him or her. In response to arraignment, the accused criminal is then excepted to enter a plea. Then the accused may not be able to post bail/bond or even be denied realase. This indvidual must stay in jail until his court hearing, the time the person waits in jail is called pretrial detention. Today throughout the world pretrial detention has caused many issues in which this paper will look further into. Some of the issues that will be explored in this paper are how pretrial detention is causing overcrowded prisons, and how that is affecting our society. Another issue that will be looked upon is the expression “innocent until proven guilty”. There are times when a offender waits in jail until his hearing for a number of years and ends up being proved innocent. What should be done for the time lost in this person’s life for waiting in a jail cell for a crime that was never committed? These are issues that concern everyone in our society; this paper will explain possible ways to bring justice to these individuals. Pretrial detention causes all types of issues from the positive and negative effects it takes on people, overcrowded prisons, and weather or not it violates certain amendments.…

    • 2311 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More

Related Topics