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
Jessica Feeney Paralegal 246 Monday / Wednesday 7 – 10:10pm People v. Green 163 Cal.App.3d 239‚ 205 CalRptr.255 (Cal App 2 Dist. 1984) Facts: The defendant Vencil Green was charged and convicted of 12 felony offenses. The defendant used a gun to commit robbery and kidnaping for the purpose of robbery. At trial court the defendant presented expert testimony that the defendant’s history of heavy usage of PCP and other illicit drugs that has affected his brain and his ability to have committed
Premium Appeal Crime Court
Citation Eisner v. Macomber‚3 AFTR 3020‚ 252 US 189‚1 USTC ¶32 (US‚ 1920) Issue (1) Under the 16th Amendment‚ does Congress have the power to tax stock dividends received by the Macomber? (2) Are stock dividends considered income? Facts Mrs. Macomber owned 2‚200 shares of Standard Oil Company. In January 1916‚ Standard Oil Company declared a 50% stock dividend. Mrs. Macomber received an additional 1‚100 shares of stock with a $19‚877 par value. The shares represented a surplus for Standard
Premium Stock market Stock Supreme Court of the United States
ruled that Tuskegee city officials redrew the cities boundaries unconstitutionally so that the white candidates in the cities political race could win and the blacks’ votes would not count. This case laid the framework for the passage of the 1965 voters rights act which outlawed discrimination in voting. The case was named after a Tuskegee university professor Charlie A. Gomillion who was the plaintiff and the defendant was the mayor of Tuskegee Phillip M. Lightfoot. Gomillion tried to make it easier
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States American Civil War
Mapp v. Ohio‚ 367 U.S. 1081‚ 81 S. Ct. 1684‚ 6 L. Ed. 2d 1081 (1961) Facts: On May 23rd‚ 1957‚ three Cleveland police officers arrived at the home of Mrs. Mapp with information that ‘a person was hiding out in the home‚ who was wanted for questioning in connection with a recent bombing‚ and that there was a large amount of policy paraphernalia being hidden in the home’. Mrs. Mapp and her daughter lived on the top floor of the two-family dwelling. Upon their arrival at that house‚ the officers
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Exclusionary rule
Sullivan v. State: Is Proportionality Really in the Eighth Amendment? TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 General Background and Procedural Information……………………4 Origins of the 8th Amendment and History of Proportionality……………………………………………………………………………………………………4 Capital Crimes and Proportionality: Furman‚ Gregg‚ Coker………………………………………………………………………………………7 The Proportionality See-Saw: Rummel to Harmelin………………9
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Capital punishment
Case Brief Funk vs. United States Supreme Court of the United States 290 U.S. 371‚ 54 S. Ct. 212 (1933) Facts: Funk was tried twice and convicted both times in Federal District Court for conspiracy to violate the prohibition law. In the first appeal to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals the decision of the Federal District Court was reversed due to issues not applicable here. 46 F.2d 417. In both trials the defendant called upon his wife to testify on his behalf and she was excluded
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States
Case Brief Saenz v Roe (1999) 1. Facts The facts of the Saenz V Roe case is that in 1992 the state of California wanted to change the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program by setting a limit to new residents. By having this approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services and having the Federal District Court implement it‚ there would a large number of new residents who would be treated unequally. By the time it became into law on April 1‚ 1997 a class action was filed to challenge
Premium United States Law Supreme Court of the United States
Case Brief Summary: Marbury v. Madison Robert L. Broadwater PAD 525 Strayer University Dr. O’Neal July 09‚ 2012 Summary of Marbury v. Madison‚ 5 U.S. 137‚ 1 Cranch 137‚ 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803). Facts The incumbent president Federalist John Adams was defeat in the presidential election by Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson. The day before leaving office‚ President John Adams named forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia. This was
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Marbury v. Madison United States Constitution
Case Brief Citation: New World Communications of Tampa‚ Inc.‚ d/b/a WTVT-TV v. Jane Akre February 14‚ 2003. Denied February 25‚ 2004. 866 So. 2d 1231 District Court of Appeal of Florida‚ Second District. Facts: In 1998‚ investigative reporting team‚ Jane Akre and her husband Steve Wilson‚ brought suit against their employer WVTV‚ a subsidiary of Fox TV‚ under violation of Florida’s whistle-blower statutes. They argued that the station had terminated their employment under
Premium Law Appeal United States