Facts: Police officers were in pursuit of a suspected drug dealer, and were led to an apartment complex. The officers ended up outside of a certain apartment, were the smell of marijuana emanated. The police knocked loudly, and from inside the apartment they heard movement, and the police believed that the sounds were an indication that evidence was being destroyed. The police announced their intent to enter the apartment, kicked the door down to find drugs and drug paraphernalia in plain sight, and arrested King and others. They continued to search the apartment and came across other evidence. King argued that due to the officers not having a warrant…
Default Judgment 5. Direct Examination 6. Discovery 7. Motion 8. Opening Statement 9.…
Facts: The evening of May 4, 1982, Charma and Hugh Riddle were in their living room watching television. Mrs. Riddle proceeded to leave the room to go to the bathroom, but was surprised to find “respondent Cartwright” in the hallway with a shotgun in his hands (1). Charma Riddle fought with Cartwright for the gun, but Cartwright was able to shoot Mrs. Riddle twice in the legs. Apparently Mrs. Riddle was familiar with Cartwright as he was a “disgruntled ex-employee” of the couple (1). Cartwright then went on to the living room where Hugh Riddle was and shot and killed him. While Cartwright was tending to Mr. Riddle, Mrs.…
The court should appeal the incorrect actions taking by Prosecutor Forbes for removing the only two African-Americans from the jury stand. Prosecutor Forbes actions were a races act due to the fact, that all jurors should have the right to attend regardless of the race, nationality or gender. The only reason Forbes could remove the two African-Americans from the jury, is if both of the jurors were a close friend of the defendant Woodson. Then the prosecutor has the right to remove both jurors from the jury.…
This project will seek to analyze the commerce clause and the gains it has made in establishing price mechanisms in the free market. At the same time, various cases will be examined starting from the Ogden Vs. Gibbons case and their impact on the free market evaluated with key concern being emphasized on the role the congress played in ensuring that market equilibrium was achieved through supply and demand controls. The paper will also analyze various cases like the Wickard v. Filburn (1942), United States v. Darby Lumber Co. (1941), NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937), Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig, Inc. (1935), Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1851) and a deep analysis done to determine how the ruling of these cases played a huge part in determining…
The landmark Sheff v. O’Neill Connecticut Supreme Court decision will have a dramatic effect on the state of education in the great state of Connecticut. The de-facto segregation of Connecticut public schools over several years has been a troubling trend that has ultimately led to the decision reached by the court. The low performance of schools in the Hartford area has been a concern of many parents and educators. A child’s education is the most valuable tool a child can receive to prepare themselves for the world. The people of Connecticut must recognize the impact that failing schools can have on the entire state. The people in the Connecticut General Assembly and yourself must act to ensure each child has a chance at fulfilling their God given talents. However, I do not believe the Connecticut Supreme Court was correct in saying that it is the…
The sonoma county court system uses diversion services for its first time juvenile offenders for certain crimes. This diversion program starts before any trial begins and after the case is analyzed to see if it qualifies. These are a lot of drug and theft cases that juveniles in the community are guilty of.…
Constitution The ultimate document that gives governments their authority; also serves to limit governmental authority, to protect civil rights, etc. Other laws, judicial decisions and executive actions must be consistent with the applicable constitution or it falls to the courts to strike down (law, decision or action).…
Justices of the United States Supreme Court are strategic actors who strive to secure policy outcomes as close to their preferred outcome as possible. Accomplishing this sometimes requires justices to not always pursue their true policy preferences and sometimes it requires justices to ignore legal and policy questions. In this essay, I will analyze how justices were strategic in a few landmark supreme court cases.…
In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The case began with the 1963 arrest of Phoenix resident Ernesto Miranda, who was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Miranda was not informed of his rights prior to the police interrogation. During the two-hour interrogation, Miranda allegedly confessed to committing the crimes, which the police apparently recorded. Miranda, who had not finished ninth grade and had a history of mental instability, had no counsel present. At trial, the prosecution's case consisted solely of his confession. Miranda was convicted of both rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. He appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming that the police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession. The court disagreed, however, and upheld the conviction. Miranda appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1966.…
That the Supreme Court exercises a policy making role has been an established fact ever since Maybury vs. Madison defined the Court’s role in judicial review of existing law. By choosing which cases to review and by establishing precedents by way interpretation of a law’s meaning and applicability the Court influences the course of action adopted not only by government but by individuals and businesses who consider the implications of the Court’s actions. In adjudicating disagreements of alternative interpretations of a law the Supreme Court establishes policies which have implications extending beyond the specific case in question and into social policy at large. In choosing which cases to review the Court calls attention to certain issues…
The Superior Court session I observed was an alcohol impairment case. The defendant in this case, had been found guilty in District Court, but had filed an appeal to the District Court’s decision.…
Does notoriety affect the outcome of a criminal court proceeding? A trial’s outcome should not be based on the notoriety of it, yet it is. Due to media coverage, the length of the trial, and the notoriety of the people who committed the crime, the outcome of the trial is affected. The Manson trials and the trial of Leopold and Loeb are two prime example of how notoriety can affect a criminal court proceeding. An analysis of two criminal court proceedings, the Manson trial and the trial of Leopold and Loeb, reveals that notoriety does affect criminal court proceedings. Even though criminal court proceedings should be based on unbiased information and evidence, overall, the notoriety of the case impacts it.…
The probability of a case being reversed for each judge is given in column 7 of the table. Judges Winkler, Panioto and Grady/Hair have the lowest probability of reversal for Common Pleas, Domestic Relations and Municipal Courts respectively. These are the probabilities for reversal for all cases disposed of, not just the ones appealed.…
The state of Georgia has approximately 350 municipal courts and five classes of trial-level courts: the magistrate, probate, juvenile, state and superior courts, along with two appellate-level courts: the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. In a magistrate court, warrants are issued, bail can be set for defendants, civil disputes such as violations, bad checks, landlord and tenant cases are settled, and minor criminal offenses are charged. In magistrate court, cases can be settled within the parties themselves instead of hiring an attorney. Probate courts issue licenses to carry firearms and marriage licenses, authorize orders to admit an incapacitated adult or other individuals to hospitalization, and handle the wills and administration of decedent’s estates. Juvenile Courts handle all cases involving underprivileged and mistreated children less than 18 years old, criminal and disorderly offenses, traffic violations, and runaway child procedures.…