251 P.Cravens 09/10/2013 CRJ 251 METZGER BRIEF STATE V. METZGER 319 N.W.2d 459 (Neb. 1982) FACTS: Defendant was seen naked with his arms at his sides from the thighs on up at his apartment window by another resident. Resident notified police on the act. The officers testified that they observed Metzger standing within a foot the window eating a bowl of cereal and that they also‚ seen that his body was nude from the mid-thigh on up. The defendant’s case was dismissed. LEGAL ISSUE: Was
Premium Law Appeal
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
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
State v. McNeely 358 S.W.3d 65 MO. (2012) Facts: The defendant was stopped by a Missouri state highway patrolman for speeding and during this stop the trooper noticed that the defendant was displaying all the tell-tale signs of being intoxicated; blood shot eyes‚ slurred speech‚ and the smell of alcohol on his breath. This stop then changed from being a speeding stop to a DWI investigation. The trooper had the defendant get out of his truck and perform standard field sobriety tests. The defendant
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Case Brief Assignment: State v. Kelbel Monique Ramirez JS 143 Professor Peterson Case: State v. Kelbel Facts: Kyle John Kelbel was convicted of first-degree murder‚ past pattern of child abuse‚ in violation of Minnesota state statute section 609.185(5) and second-degree murder‚ in violation of Minnesota statute 609.19‚ subdivision 2(1). He was sentenced to life in prison for the death of Kailyn Marie Montgomery. Kelbel appealed‚ and argued that the district court failed to instruct
Premium Jury Law Murder
Running head: Terry v. Ohio‚ 392 U.S. 1 Case Brief of Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 October 4‚ 2014 Facts At approximately 2:30 in the afternoon‚ while patrolling a downtown beat in plain clothes‚ Detective McFadden observed two men (later identified as Terry and Chilton) standing on a street corner. The two men walked back and forth an identical route a total of 24 times‚ pausing to stare inside a store window. After the completion of walking the route‚ the two men would
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Terry v. Ohio
CASE BRIEF FOR THE WINDSOR V. STATE OF ALABAMA WINDSOR V. STATE OF ALABAMA 683 So. 2d 1021 (1994) Judicial History: Harvey Lee Windsor was convicted of capital murder under § 13-A-5-40 (a)(2)‚ Code of Alabama 1975. The jury unanimously recommended the death penalty and the trial court accepted the jury’s recommendation and sentenced the appellant to death by electrocution. Windsor then appealed the conviction and sentence to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Facts: Harvey Lee Windsor and Lavon Gunthrie
Premium Court Jury Supreme Court of the United States
Le Barron v. State 145 N.W. 2d 79 (Wis. 1966) History David Le Barron was sentenced to 15 years in prison for attempted rape. He appealed and the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. Facts Jodean Randen‚ a housewife‚ wass walking home when she crossed paths with the Le Barron. He grabbed her and demanded her purse. She gave him the purse and started quickly walking away. When he discovered the purse was empty‚ he went after her‚ grabbed her‚ and told her not to scream. He then
Premium Court Appeal Appellate court
reasonably to enhance the contractual objectiveness of a case. Judges use the grounds of how a ‘reasonable’ observer would interpret the facts to determine whether the elements of a contract are evident within an agreement to then make it legally binding‚ and whether the contractual performance of the parties was acted in good faith. This in effect allows for more procedural fairness‚ taking into account all matters within judicial review. Within this case‚ Robb J reasons that there is a legally binding contract
Premium
Swan v. Talbot‚ Phelan v. Gardner‚ Marron v. Marron Case Briefs Jennifer Beverly PA205-02 Professor Byron Grim June 20‚ 2011 Case Briefs Citation: Swan v. Talbot‚ 152 Cal. 142 (Cal. 1907) Facts: George Swan‚ plaintiff‚ sold James R. Talbot‚ defendant‚ a portion of personal property. Swan was inebriated at the time the deal was prepared. The portion of the property sold to Talbot was valued at $21‚949.86. Talbot paid Swan $10‚604.32‚ this included $200 in coin that was paid to Swan
Premium Appeal