Preview

Jennings and Armington

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
278 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Jennings and Armington
Running Head: JENNINGS AND ARMINGTON 1

Marlene Clarke Kaplan University LS 311-02 Business Law Professor Toni Starcher September 12th 2012

JENNINGS AND ARMINGTON 2

Armington, while robbing a drugstore, shot and seriously injured Jennings, a drugstore clerk. Armington was subsequently convicted in a criminal trial of armed robbery, assault and battery. Jennings later brought a civil tort suit against Armington for damages. Armington contended that he could not be tried again for the same crime, as that would constitute double jeopardy, which is prohibited in the Fifth Amendment to the constitution. In this situation, Armington is incorrect about the double jeopardy law and he should accept responsibility for what he did. The Fifth Amendment offers certain protection to the defendant but the law must maintain fairness and consistency. According to the text, the Fifth Amendment does not allow a person to be tried twice for the same crime. In other words, if a person faces trial for a crime and is found not guilty and later on new evidence is discovered to link the person to the crime, they cannot stand trial a second time. Double jeopardy does not prohibit damages entitled to the victim in a civil suit. A civil tort suit occurs when someone has been hurt so the law allows them to seek



References: * Miller, L.R. & Jentz, G.A. (2010). Fundamentals of business law: Summarized cases (8th Edition). Ohio: Cengage Learning

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Twomey, D. P., & Jennings, M. M. (2014). Business law: Principles for today’s commercial environment (4th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.…

    • 1509 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    At the trial, Tate moved to suppress evidence obtained during the investigation. As he did this, he noticed that when Officer Benda parked behind Tate, it was an unlawful seizure according to the fourth amendment. The court concluded that he was seized with reason to believe Tate was under the influence. This caused the conclusions to be reversed and was therefore inadmissible at trail. This case was moved to the district court and this court concluded that a person could not be seized within the meaning of the fourth amendment if he is unaware of the police presence. The court also concluded that Officer Benda had reasonable suspicion to arrest Tate, thus reversing the conclusions and was therefore inadmissible at…

    • 448 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The men who he hired kidnapped his wife in one state and killed her in another. In February 1982, the petitioner pleaded guilty to “malice murder” in Georgia in exchange for a sentence of life imprisonment. However, he was also prosecuted in an Alabama trial court for murder during a kidnapping. He was convicted and sentenced to death from the Alabama court. He claimed that the second trial exposed him to Double Jeopardy in violation of the clause of the Fifth Amendment. Mr. Heath appealed, but the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals and the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the conviction.…

    • 460 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As further reiterated, “Confessions remain a proper element in law enforcement. Any statement given freely and voluntarily without any compelling influences is, of course, admissible in evidence.” Furthermore, the Fifth Amendment does not bar voluntary statements by definition. The Fifth Amendment explicitly states “No person shall…be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”. The issue here was whether or not the conversation was in fact an interrogation based on the subdivision called the “functional equivalent” of questioning, described as ‘any words or actions on the part of the police that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect’. The court found that the conversation did not fall within the Miranda meaning of “interrogation” because it was concluded as being nothing more than a dialogue between the two officers, which invited no response from the respondent, and was clearly not a questioning initiated by officers. Furthermore, the conversation also was found not to fall under the description of “functional equivalent” because the few ‘offhand’ remarks that the officers made to one another in no way subjected the respondent to elicit a statement of admission, nor were the officers’ actions subjecting the respondent. Consequently, the respondent was found to have given a confession in a voluntary manner and that his Fifth Amendment rights were not deprived because he was not compelled or forced in any way to…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    People v. Sisuphan

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Fifth Amendment right to present defense and “all pertinent evidence of significant value to that defense” was not violated because the “return of the property is not a defense to embezzlement. Fraudulent intent is an essential element of embezzlement. Although restoration of the property is not a defense, evidence of repayment may be relevant to the extent it shows that a defendant’s intent at the time of the taking was not fraudulent.”…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages

    * 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The fifth amendment prohibits double jeopardy (del Carmen, 2014). The concept behind prohibiting double jeopardy is to protect the defendant from being tried and punished twice for a single crime, but this doesn’t mean that after a verdict is handed down the process ends (del Carmen, 2014). They can try and get an appeal so that their case and verdict will be reviewed (del Carmen, 2014).…

    • 335 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Thomkins Research Paper

    • 201 Words
    • 1 Page

    On January 10, 2000, two people got shot on the outside of a shopping mall; one person was killed and another wounded. Thompkins was convicted of murder and firearms related charges in Michigan state trial court. Thompkins was arrested one year later, the police officers had him to read a written form with the Miranda Warnings and the officer read the rest of the form to Thompkins. The police officer asks Thompkins to sign the form to show that he understood his right and he refused. The officers interrogated Thompkins for nearly three hours, Thimpkins responses the police officers with “yes”, “no” or “I don’t know”. Thimpkins didn’t state that he wished to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to stay silent. Later, an officer asked Thompkins if…

    • 201 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Unit 4 Assignment

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Once John was in custody, the procedural steps the police were required to take once John began to incriminate himself was to read John his Miranda rights. The Miranda Warning is required for law enforcement to read when a suspect is taken into custody and is going to be questioned or interrogated. If the Miranda Warning is not read, it is a violation of the suspects fifth amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. In Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court held that the admission of an elicited incriminating statement by a suspect not informed of these rights violates the Fifth and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. That means if a law enforcement official decides to not read a suspect their Miranda rights and they end up being interrogated, they cannot use that person's statements to incriminate them in a criminal trial. This is why it was very important that the police read John his Miranda Rights.…

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In this case, the verdict was again incorrect, however the events surrounding the case were different. The underlying philosophy of the Clause is that: “‘The State with all its resources and power should not be allowed to make repeated attempts to convict an individual for an alleged offense, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment, expense and ordeal and compelling him to live in a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity’… Double jeopardy protection was thus intended to protect the individual from the tyranny and power of the government” (Melenyzer). When the framers established this procedural clause, they intended on creating a defense for individuals who were undeniably innocent. Although double jeopardy protects individuals presumed not guilty from a retrial on the same charges, it does not account for the possibility that a guilty individual was presumed not guilty.…

    • 1501 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Federal Jurisdiction

    • 868 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Morgan, J.F., Shedd, P.J., & CorleY, R.N. (2010). Business Law (3rd ed.). BVT Publishing, LLC…

    • 868 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The 5th Amendment, protects you from being held for committing a crime unless you have been indicted correctly by the police. Also that the state have to respect your legal rights. Double Jeopardy is also described as you can not be tried for the same crime twice, unless it's a mistrial or hung Jury. The most well known right of the 5th Amendment is your Miranda Rights; right against compelled self-incrimination. Also you can not be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against yourself. A person who is "in custody" must be given the Miranda warning to protect his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. However, the second part of the Miranda warning protects a suspect's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The Miranda warning is read as…

    • 581 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The 5th Amendment

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages

    are expected to tell the truth, even if that truth was to put you in…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Fifth Amendment

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Federalists (James Madison) introduced and supported the provisions of the 5th amendment. Madison included a constitutional provision that an individual shall not “be compelled to be a witness against himself.” Congress added the words “in any criminal case”, meaning that the provision, which will become one of the Fifth Amendment’s clauses providing safeguards against abuse of criminal laws. Because the idea that double jeopardy was wrong was so widely upheld by the colonists, James Madison also presented the Double Jeopardy Clause to Congress.…

    • 1034 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Juvenile Court System

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages

    This Article, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, expresses that, no individual might be held to respond in due order regarding a capital, or generally scandalous wrongdoing, unless on a presentment or arraignment of a Grand Jury, nor should one be constrained in any criminal body of evidence to be an observer against himself.…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays