It was Ricky Franklin Smith fourth offense, in which he was known as a habitual offender. He pleaded guilty to a charge of breaking and entering. During his hearing in the Court of Appeals, Smith suggested that he deserve a resentence due to the fact his charges was base upon his expunged juvenile criminal record. The Court of Appeals referred back to the case in People v. Price, 172 Mich App 396, 399-400; 431 NW2d 524 (1988) that suggested that in pursuant to MCR 5.913 when a juvenile record is expunged it cannot be used in a sentencing. Whereas, People v. Jones 173 Mich App 341, 343;433 NW2d 829 (1988) states that an expunged juvenile record can be included in an investigation report and in a sentencing(People v. Smith, 2017). Smith lawyer …show more content…
Therefore, Ricky Smith was sentenced to serve his time concurrently with the other sentence that he had encountered. However, in the case of People v. McFarlin, 389 Mich 557; 208 NW2d 504 (1973), it was suggested that a judge has the right to consider an adult offender's juvenile record, whereas the Probate Code suggests the probate *299 court cannot use a juvenile record as proper evidence against a child in any case in any civil, criminal, or other cause except under a Juveniles and Juvenile Division Chapter of the Probate Code(People v. Smith, 2017). Shortly after in 1978, the Court adopted JCR 13, in which provided automatic expungement juvenile offender records, providing within seven years afterward there is not a felony conviction(People v. Smith, 2017). The Panel of a different court has encountered this situation before, for instance in the People v. Price, 172 Mich App 396, 399-400; 431 NW2d 524 (1988) found that an automat expunge pursuant to MCR 5.913 will not use a juvenile record in court sentencing whereas, in the case of People v. Jones, 173 Mich App 341; 433 NW2d 829 (1988) suggests that a expunged juvenile record could be a factor in sentencing and included in the
In reviewing People v Price, 172 Mich App386, 300-400; 431 NW2d829 (1988), the court found that the panel ruled that the juvenile record was automatically expunged and therefore could not be considered for the purpose of sentencing (justlaw). Conversely, the court found in People v Jones, 173 Mich App 341, 343; 433 NW2d 829 (1988), a second panel concluded that the expunged criminal history of juveniles was admissible in the presentence report as well as the consideration during
United States v. Morrison was a supreme court case about violence against women. In 1944 while enrolled at Virginia polytechnic institute, Christy Brzonkala alleged that Antonio Morrison and James Crawford sexually assaulted her. Both male students were varsity football players. In 1995 Christy filed a complaint against Morrison and Crawford under Virginia Tech 's Sexual Assault Policy. After a hearing, Morrison was found guilty and Crawford was not.
People vs. Tuner Case Analysis Background Brock Allen Turner was a nineteen-year-old star athlete, a freshmen swimmer at Stanford University who was admitted in the fall of 2014 on a swimming scholarship. On January 17, 2015, he attended a party at Kappa Alpha fraternity house where he met the victim, twenty-year-old women who later identified as Emily Doe, her sister and their friends. Turner and the victim both consumed alcohol at the party. Shortly after the midnight of January 18, 2015, Tuner and the victim left the party and the victim was split up from her friends. The victim made a couple unintelligible phone calls from 11:54p.m to 12:28 a.m with her friends, then later on passed out behind a nearby dumpster outside the fraternity
On July 1965, he pleaded guilty to armed robbery in Wisconsin (Gagnon v. Scarpelli: 411 U.S. 778 (1973). (n.d.). Later, the judge sentenced him to 15 years sentences in the Wisconsin State Reformatory at Green Bay. Within three years they suspended his sentences given his a seven-year probation.
Facts: Earl Enmund along with a codefendant at the Florida Supreme Court, was convicted of first-degree murder and robbery as well as given the death penalty. Enmund was not present at the time of the murder, he was in the car waiting for the codefendant to return in order to escape. Under Florida law Enmund was made the aider and abettor meaning that he can be held to the same extent as the principal. Issue: Does the death sentence violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment for someone who did not commit the murder but was the getaway driver? Reasoning:
Introduction: The United States Supreme Court cases of Brady v. Maryland, Giglio v. United States, and United States v. Agurs all deal with the prosecution's obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense. These cases establish that prosecutors have a constitutional duty to disclose all evidence favorable to the accused. Failure to disclose this information violates due process and can result in a new trial or acquittal.
Ricky Franklin Smith was charged (as an adult) with breaking and entering a building with intents to commit larceny. Smith acknowledged that he had broken a window of a warehouse Pontiac, entered the building, and removed property without permission. Therefore Smith was sentenced to three and one-half to ten years for breaking and entering as a first time offender. But that sentence was vacated and Smith was sentenced to serve six to thirty years as a habitual offender (this was his fourth offense). Smith filed an appeal for improper sentencing because he cited that presentencing court judge used his juvenile record to characterize him as a “habitual offender” and a “danger to society”.
The defendant was considered a habitual offender; fourth offense. He appealed his rights and was awarded a resentence; Docket No. 87874 People v. Smith, 470 NW2d 70, Michigan Supreme Court (1991). Smith case was referenced to People v. Price
Dred Scott vs. Sanford case was the biggest mistake in U.S history, hands down. It is listed as the first case of the top ten worst Supreme Court decisions. Dred scotts case was the most significant because after his, no other case had ruined the reputation of the court quite as bad. This case was a huge deal, and is still an important subject to teach to students today. This case was said to be the case that started the civil war, although that may be an exaggeration.
Based upon his decision to plead guilty, Smith was convicted of breaking and entering. This was also his fourth
The Marbury vs. Madison case resulted in what is considered the most important Supreme Court decision in history. The Marbury v. Madison case was a fundamental case in which an act of Congress was declared unconstitutional by the court. The court's ruling established the power of judicial review, solidified the Constitutional system of checks and balances, strengthened the power of the federal government, and made the Judiciary an equal partner with the Legislative and Executive branches of government, reinforcing the doctrine of separation of powers. A decision that would decrease the power of the Supreme Court due to what the court deemed as unconstitutional powers granted it by Congress under the Judicial Act of 1789
The Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention and Protection Act (JJDPA) was established in 1974 and was the first federal law that dealt comprehensively with juvenile delinquency to improve the juvenile justice system and support state and local efforts at delinquency prevention. This paper will assess the JJDPA and summarize its purpose and implementation and enforcement. Next, there will be a discussion of the historical context of the policy; followed by a focus of the latent consequences. Finally there will be a vignette as to how this Act has affected a person or family as well as personal reflection toward the policy.
"The State of California versus Scott Lee Peterson (Case number 1056770, 2005)", was an interesting case. This case was interesting because Laci was a very beautiful and seemingly young, friendly, and happily pregnant woman with lots of friends. Her husband, although attractive, had a kind of macho tough guy womanizer type of persona about himself. It is hard to believe or fathom someone being so cruel as to kill their pregnant wife, regardless of their marital problems. Laci came up missing on December 24, of 2002, the day before Christmas.
This is due to the state law providing for the sealing of juvenile records when a person has reached 20 years of age (Miss. Code, 1972). Although the records are supposed to be sealed, state law does apply for 20 exceptions to this requirement, including the records being used by the judges of the circuit courts. The circuit court judges may request a presentence investigation on any person who is convicted of a felony. This investigation is to include a complete criminal history of the offender, to include juvenile adjudications, and is to be used by the judge to determine an appropriate sentence (Miss. Code,
Many critics, including myself, believe that the United States Supreme Court incorrectly decided the case of Michael H. vs. Gerald D. The case was argued on October 11th, 1988 and the Court decided their stance on June 15th, 1989. The court decided that a father related by blood to his child that was also seen as adulterous, does not have the constitutional rights to paternity over the father who is married to the mother of said child. Contradicting this stance, many critics have stated their opinions on the matter.