Penney WedBetter Professor James Barney LSTD502 Criminal Law Case Brief: State v Stark October 19‚ 2014 Citation: State v. Stark‚ 832 P.2d 109 (Wash.App. 1992) Posture: Stark appealed upon conclusion of a criminal jury and bench trial to Washington Appellate court from in which he was found guilty of three counts of second-degree assault as a result of exposing three female partners to HIV virus on over 6 occasions where he used a condom some of the time and after vaginal intercourse ejaculated
Premium Law Jury Appeal
Petitioner: AIR INDIA STATUTORY CORPORATION. Vs. Respondent: UNITED LABOUR UNION & ORS. The appeals by special leave arise from the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated April 28‚ 1992 made in Appeal No. 146 of 1990 and batch. The facts in appeal arising out of S.L.P. 7417/92‚ are sufficient to decide the questions of law that have arisen in these appeals. The appellant initially was a statutory authority under International Airport Authority of India Act. 1971 (for short
Premium Employment Trade union
in this period of time‚ and that team is Manchester United. Manchester United F.C. was founded in 1878 as Newton Heath LYR F.C. and the name was changed to Manchester United F.C. in 1902. Manchester United F.C.’s home ground is Old Trafford‚ which is located in the city of Manchester. The team’s nickname is The Red Devils; the nickname was given to them because of the picture of a red devil that appears on the team’s badge. Manchester United only missed one season in the Barclays Premier League
Premium
Mapp v. Ohio‚ 1961 According to the Court’s decision‚ why may illegally seized evidence not be used in a trial? Justice Tom C. Clark wrote on the courts behalf saying that it was logically and constitutionally necessary that the exclusion doctrine be insisted upon‚ even in the states. This doctrine is essential to the right of privacy‚ therefore evidence that is found illegally without a warrant must not be used in a trial‚ for this would be unconstitutional. Why‚ according to Justice
Premium Law United States United States Constitution
Josh Mason Ms. Neagle Civics/per. 3 5 February‚ 2013 Marbury v. Madison Marbury v. Madison was a very influential Supreme Court case in the history of the United States. Marbury v. Madison was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review. This happened under Article III in the Constitution. The court case helped to make a boundary between the executive and judicial branches of the American form of government. In the final days of
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Marbury v. Madison James Madison
1. Name of the Case: Linda W illiamson v. City of Houston‚ Texas‚ 148 F.3d 462‚ 1998. 2. Facts: In 1990‚ Linda Williamson‚ a police officer with the City of Houston Police Department‚ was assigned to the Organized Crime Squad. Officer Doug McLeod‚ another member of this squad‚ began sexually harassing her on a daily basis and this behavior lasted for approximately 18 months. The harassing behavior occurred in front of other police officers‚ including the officers’ supervisor‚ Sergeant Bozeman. McLeod’s
Premium Police Appeal Constable
Chapter 11 R.J smith Gibbons v Ogden This case involved New York trying to grant a monopoly on waterborne trade between New York and New Jersey. Judge Marshal‚ of the Supreme Court‚ sternly reminded the state of New York that the Constitution gives Congress alone the control of interstate commerce. Marshal’s decision‚ in 1824‚ was a major blow on states’ rights. John C. Calhoun John C. Calhoun was part of the New Southern Congress of 1811. He was a representative for South Carolina and one
Premium Martin Van Buren Andrew Jackson
Charisma Thorpe Brunswick Political Systems- Final 6 October 2014 Miranda v. Arizona Outline Argued: February 28‚ March 1 and 2‚ 1966 Decided: June 13‚ 1966 Supreme Court Decision: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Miranda and it also enforced the Miranda warning to be given to a person being interrogated while in the custody of the police. Miranda Warning: You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States
Name: |Date: | |Graded Assignment Korematsu v. the United States (1944) Use the background information and the primary sources in the Graded Assignment: Primary Sources sheet to answer the following questions. (2 points) |Score | | | 1. What did Fred T. Korematsu do that resulted in his arrest and conviction? Answer: (2 points) |Score | | | 2. According to the first paragraph from the excerpts
Premium United States
Anti-Hero Called “V” John Doe ENG 225 Introduction to Film No one June 16‚ 2012 Anti-Hero Called “V” V for Vendetta in many ways is a movie that has been done before. It presents a post apocalyptic landscape (ex: 1984 (1984)‚ Clockwork Orange (1971)) where a totalitarian leadership rises from the ashes of chaos offering salvation‚ only to deliver oppression to the masses while demanding blind obedience in return‚ or else! In this society/film we are given the various archetype villains
Premium V for Vendetta Totalitarianism Nineteen Eighty-Four