Title of Case: Florida v. Michael A. Riley Legal Citation: 488 U.S. 445‚ 109 S.Ct. 693‚ 102 L.Ed.2d. 835 (1989) Procedural History: The respondent‚ Michael A. Riley‚ was charged with possession of marijuana under Florida law. The trail court granted his motion to suppress; the Court of Appeals reversed but certified the case to the Florida Supreme Court‚ which rejected the decision of the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trail court’s suppression order. The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
computers. Founded forty-one years ago and becoming one of the biggest electronic companies on the planet‚ Microsoft has become well established. The company has had bumps in their forty-one years of operations‚ though. The United States v. Microsoft antitrust case was initiated on May18‚1998 by the United States Department of Justice. The company was accused of becoming an monopoly‚ but moreover‚ “engaging” in derogatory practices. These vulgar practices that Microsoft was accused of where contrary
Premium Microsoft Operating system Microsoft Windows
Issue: Barry Jewell was convicted of burglary with a deadly weapon resulting in serious bodily injury‚ a class A felony. Also‚ Battery resulting in serious bodily injury‚ a class C felony. Rule: The court used the case‚ Ellyson V. State‚ 603 N.E.2d 1369‚ 1373 (Ind. Ct.App.1992) In that case‚ Ellyson was charged with burglary because he broke into the house where him and his estranged wife lived with the intent to rape her. He was still charged with burglary even though he had the right to possession
Premium Felony Marriage Crimes
that the people know details about the professional and sometimes even personal lives of elected and selected officials. When the conviction in the Supreme Court’s Gideon v. Wainwright was reversed‚ news spread across the country and those who were convicted without given the right to legal counsel could petition to have their cases retried as well. The draw back to the information age is the accuracy and usefulness of the information that
Premium Mass media United States United States Constitution
MICHAEL E. KLEIBER v HONDA OF AMERICA MFG.‚ INC.‚ Plaintiff-Appellant‚ Defendant-Appellee. FRL 302 – Professor Young Group Project INTRODUCTION This appellate case is about a man‚ Michael Kleiber who suffered a debilitating head injury that ultimately lead to his job termination as a factory worker for Honda. Honda claimed that they were unable to accommodate Kleiber’s disability on the basis that Kleiber was not able to perform the job tasks for any alternate job positions. Honda
Premium Fine motor skill Hand Motor control
which are marriage‚ death‚ and birth if reported to legal office‚ observations made while on public duty like how many times an officer has had disciplinary actions against him or her while on duty. Cases filed in courts prior
Premium Crime Law Police
Part 2 - Choose ONE of the options [pic] Part 1 - Choose one part of the assigned textbook question to answer An important concept this week is jurisdiction. As the text explains‚ a court must have subject matter jurisdiction to hear a case. Subject matter jurisdiction is rather straight forward - the court must have jurisdic tion to hear the particular type of dispute (see my video for further explanation of this concept). Now look at Question 2 (p. 71) and pick either b‚ c‚ or d
Premium Law Jurisdiction Appeal
State v. Evans‚ 671 N.W. 2d 720 (Iowa‚ 2003) In the late 1990’s Rebecca Arnold was attending Scott County Community College for nursing. While attending college Arnold encountered Hubert Evans‚ a published photographer with a foot fetish. It was during this random interaction that Evans asked Arnold to photograph her feet‚ Arnold declined. Evans had even told Arnold that he helped other women‚ whose pictures he had taken become “big models”. At some point in 1998‚ Evans obtained Arnold’s telephone
Premium Abuse Iowa Harassment
1. Case Name‚ Citation‚ and Court. Lee V. Weisman 120 L.EDd. 2d 467 (1992) United States Supreme Court 2. Summary
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment which in 1934 the “which protects a defendant from being compelled to be a witness against themselves” (Wright‚ 2013). The self-incrimination portion of the Fifth Amendment was tested case of Miranda v. Arizona. This is the same case that leads to the Miranda Warning. The Miranda warning is an “explanation of rights that must be given before any custodial interrogation” so that self-incrimination will not be a factor. No person can be compelled to openly admit to a crime. They
Premium Crime Police Law