1. Mapp v. Ohio‚ 170 Ohio St. 427‚ 166 N. E. 2d 387‚ reversed. 2. Dollree Mapp was convicted on one count in the Ohio State Court for the possession of obscene material. The possession of obscene material was illegal in Ohio and the time of the search. There was dispute of whether or not the search was permitted by search warrant. She was eventually found guilty of by the State of Ohio because the state said‚ “even if the search were made without authority‚ otherwise unreasonably‚ it is not prevented
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Mapp v. Ohio
Bria Payton Case Brief: United States v. Peterson‚ 483 F.2d 1222 (1973) Issue: Is self-defense available for a justifiable homicide case? Facts: The victim‚ Charles Keitt‚ drove to an alley way to obtain windshield wipers off the defendant’s car‚ Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson observed the victim‚ Mr. Keitt‚ doing this and confronted him with an altercation. The victim went back to his car and the defendant‚ Mr. Peterson‚ returned inside his home. The victim was about to leave‚ but because the defendant
Premium
C.Richmond v. Croson(1989) D.The case deals with the city Council of Richmond passing a law that made is so companies that had construction contracts with the city had to subcontract at least 30 percent of their business to a business that has minority ownership. This lead to the J.A. Croson Company losing a contract because the company does not have a minority owner. This lead to the company starting a suit against Richmond. E. Is the law passed by Richmond breaching the fourteenth amendment’s equal
Premium High school Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District 393 U.S. 503 "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." This was the main argument from Justice Abe Fortas that came into play at the Tinker v. Des Moines School District Case of 1969. The case involved a small group of students who silently dissented against the government’s policy during the ongoing Vietnam War by wearing black
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
In 1927‚ there was a case called Buck V. Bell‚ which in this particular case it involved a hearing that was required to determine whether or not the enforced eugenic sterilization was a wise thing to do. Today‚ I will write about The Supreme Court of Buck V. Bell‚ the definition of eugenic movement‚ and the role of eugenic movement in this case‚ and I will also address Oliver’s Wendell Holmes statement. The main person in this case was named Carrie Buck; she was a feebleminded woman who was committed
Premium Pregnancy Abortion Childbirth
CJE 1600 Criminal Investigations Professor Stevie Hayes January 12‚ 2013 Why is non-verbal communication important when testifying before a jury‚ and what suggestions do you have for helping a testifying officer make a positive impression on a jury? Jurors are selected by the judge‚ prosecution and the defending attorney. The judge will provide the list of potential jurors to both the prosecution and the defending attorney for the selection process to participate in the trial case. For either
Free Jury Judge Voir dire
Wisconsin v. Yoder‚ 406 U.S. 205 (1972) In the year 1971‚ two parents whose names were Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller who were of the Old Order Amish religion and one parent whose name was Adin Yutzy who was of the member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church were accused under a Wisconsin law that stated all students under sixteen should go to school. The Parents all believed it was against their religious beliefs for their children to go to high school and they refused to send their children
Premium Supreme Court of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution High school
Chester v Afshar - Case brief 1) Title and Citation Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41 Plaintiff: Chester Defendant: Afshar Court: House of Lords Judges: Lord Steyn‚ Lord Hope‚ Lord Walker‚ Lord Bingham and Lord Hoffmann 2) Facts of the case Miss Chester‚ the plaintiff‚ suffered from low back pain since 1988. During 1994‚ Miss Chester was referred to Mr. Afshar‚ a neurosurgeon‚ who happens to be the defendant. The defendant advised the plaintiff to undergo an elective lumbar surgical procedure
Premium Appeal Surgery Law
Davis v. Davis‚ Justice Daughtrey created an epoche of the law when she‚ unlike previous judges‚ based her decision on the recognition of a new category more relevant to the case rather than relying on one previously established. She casts aside conventional thoughts and residual knowledge by declaring the case to present a "question of first impression" which will require the court to act through common law. Although Justice Daughtrey relates other statutes‚ cases‚ and constitutions to the case‚ she
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Law
In the case Gonzales v. Raich‚ Angel Raich‚ which is from California‚ was charged with home-grown‚ non-commercial use of medical marijuana. Raich has inoperable brain tumor‚ seizures‚ and chronic pain disorders. Raich has been prescribed medical marijuana 5 years before the cases even came up in court. Raich has to depend on 2 caregivers to grow the medical marijuana for her because of her condition. Before Gonzales v. Raich case came up‚ California passed the Compassionate Use Act in 1996. With
Premium