is that enough? If not‚ what should we do? The letters alone are not enough to help Mr. Jamison. Herrera v. Collins says that‚ generally‚ a “free-standing” claim of innocence based solely on newly discovered evidence does not state a ground for federal habeas relief‚ unless it is coupled with an independent constitutional violation that occurred in the criminal proceedings. Herrera v. Collins‚ 506 U.S. 390‚ 400-01 (1993). The Court seemingly left open the question of whether a very powerful showing
Premium Jury Law Supreme Court of the United States
Terry Fedrick v. Cliff Nichols d/b/a C&N Truck and Trailer Repair The term Bailment is derived from the French Bailor‚ "to deliver". A bailment is a temporary transfer of property to another for a limited time and for a specific purpose. The transfer of property in a bailment is only in regards to possession‚ not ownership. The bailor is the owner of the transferred property. The bailee holds the transferred property. The property is held in trust for the benefit of the bailor. A bailment is completely
Premium Tort Legal terms Tort law
applies to any weakness or predisposition of the plaintiff to a particular injury or illness regardless of the defendant’s knowledge. An illustration of this rule can be found in the following case which are; Smith v Leech Brain & Co Ltd (1962) and Robinson v Post office (1974) 1 WLR 1176. The case of Smith v Leech Brain is about a galvanizer who is the plaintiff’s husband and work at the defendant’s company. His job is to lift articles into a tank of a molten metal via a crane. The plaintiff’s husband
Premium Law Tort Tort law
The Fair Use Doctrine has been a practice used in the United State Supreme Courts dating back to 1841 in the case of Folsom v. Marsh. In this case “the court’s definition of what constituted a "justifiable use of the original materials" formed the basis of the "fair use" doctrine” (ARL staff‚ 2014). The court must decide if the case meets four factors noted in section 107 of the Copyright Act when considering the Fair Use defense‚ “the purpose and character of your use‚ the nature of the copyrighted
Premium Copyright Fair use Property
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
Although students do not lose their rights as they walk through the school gates‚ their rights are restricted for the safety of others. The court case of Tinker v. Des Moines argues the same issue of the rights of students while on school grounds. “Because the appearance of the armbands distracted students from their work‚ they detracted from the ability of the school officials to perform their duties
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Supreme Court case I wanted to research‚ the thought of picking the death penalty topic originally swayed me. I did not want to pick such a controversial subject‚ but I grew more and more intrigued as I read deeper into the case of Gregg vs. Georgia in 1976. The case stirred up many views about capital punishment and allowing a criminal to manipulate the wording of our country’s Constitution to refuse personal responsibility. Throughout the research and trying to form an opinion of the case‚ I wondered
Premium Gregg v. Georgia Capital punishment Supreme Court of the United States
in the South was needed. This made the American economy dependent upon slavery. There was much debate about the ethics of slavery and many thought it to be wrong. In 1857‚ the United States Supreme Court case of “Dred Scott v. Sandford” took place that changed America as we know it. This case brought up the issues of slavery and the future of the US. It brought to light the important responsibility politicians have in making important decisions that can affect the future. A
Premium Slavery in the United States Supreme Court of the United States Abraham Lincoln
INTRODUCTION: Miranda v. Arizona was argued February 28 -March 2‚ 1966; Decided on June 13‚ 1966. Miranda was apprehended at his home and taken into custody to the police station where the accusing witness recognized him. Miranda was questioned for two hours by to police officers‚ which followed by a signed and written confession that presented to the jury. The oral‚ and written confession were handed over at the trial to the jury. Miranda was guilty of kidnapping as well as rape; he was punished
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
United States v. Jones‚ United States Supreme Court (2012) 132 S. Ct. 945 Facts of the Case Respondent Jones was a subject of a Government investigation in part of a much larger drug trafficking conspiracy. As part of the investigation‚ FBI agents had obtained a court order to place a GPS tracking device on a vehicle driven by Jones – a Jeep registered to Jone’s wife. The court order was issued in the District of Columbia and was set to expire 10 days after it was signed by the judge. On Day
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution