ipl-logo

Apprendi Vs New Jersey Case Study

860 Words4 Pages

Apprendi vs. New Jersey Apprendi vs. New Jersey landmarked United States Supreme Court decisions dealing with provoking factors in crimes. Furthermore, it was found that judges were prohibited to sentence beyond the maximum amount because of factors other than the ones found by the jury. Beyond a reasonable doubt was the key word in this case. This case decision has been the precedent for the rights of people in jury trials. This case set the tone for other trials where an increased prison term was questionable. It was December 22, 1994, sometime early in the morning, when Charles C. Apprendi shot numerous rounds from his .22 caliber rifle into an African-American family’s home. Their house was located in Vineland, New Jersey in an all-white …show more content…

He was charged with second-degree possession of a firearm, a five to ten year sentence. During the case his charges were not seen as part of the state's hate crime Gragg2 act, which includes a much harsher prison sentence, if shown by the evidence that the defendant committed the crime for the sole purpose of harming someone because of their ethnicity. With all the charges in hand Apprendi was looking at close to ten years in prison. However, the judge of the trial attempted to increase his sentence because of the states hate crime act. Apprendi went on to challenge the charges. He believed that it was unconstitutional to get an increased sentence based on the evidence that was given. His argument was that according to the due process clause it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to a jury. He claimed it wasn’t constitutional for a judge to make that ruling just based on the evidence presented to him. The main question of this case was whether the fourth amendment requires that an improved maximum prison term for an offense of ten to twenty years be proven with facts beyond the reasonable …show more content…

Apprendi even presented a confirmation from a psychologist and from several witnesses who testified that he had not had a past of being racist. He did not believe that the statement the police gave was accurate. When he made the testimony he described that his actions were a result of the intoxication, rejecting that it had anything to do with the fact that the family was African-American. He denied being racially biased what so ever. Even with his statement and the eye witnesses, the judge decided that he would use the police officers

Show More
Related
1347 Words | 6 Pages

The Supreme Court of New Jersey also failed in their jobs. They failed to allow evidence from another case that was in some ways connected to the defendants Case. Another item that the Supreme Court failed to do was disregard anything the defendant stated under the circumstance that all of his interrogations were not recorded. I don’t dislike the police, but the fact that the recorder was on the table and the police did not turn it on raises the question of “was it a false confession?”

Read More
1281 Words | 6 Pages

Case: South Carolina v. Christopher Frank Pittman (Findlaw, 2008) Facts: That Pittman, shot and morality wounded both his grandparents, Joe Frank and Joy Pittman, with a .410 shotgun. Appellant was 12 years old at time of alleged incident, he was abandoned by his mother, and his relationship with his father was abusive. Prior to moving in with grandparents, appellant had been committed to an inpatient facility, where he was on the antidepressant Paxil, soon he was released and permitted to live with grandparents (Findlaw, 2008). .

Read More
1680 Words | 7 Pages

People of the State of New York v. Jennifer Jorgensen was criminal court case that went to the Court of Appeals in New York. Judge Pigott gives his/her opinion. Jennifer Jorgensen was 34 weeks on the date of the crime. Defendant was under the influenced of both drugs and alcohol. Jorgensen was driving under the influence on Whiskey Road in Suffolk County.

Read More
955 Words | 4 Pages

The Supreme Court stated the proof could not be used against the person in state courts and that Dollree Mapp could not be convicted. Mapp was released and her case helped to strengthen the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The matter also limited police power. I agree with the final outcome of the case. I would say the Supreme Court made the right decision with the information given.

Read More
1409 Words | 6 Pages

The Assault of the Delivery Man Regina vs. Mattachioni is a case of assault causing bodily harm. This is a criminal law issue which was dealt with and ruled over by Justice De Filippis. Mr. Mattachioni violated section 267 of the Criminal Code when he punched the complainant Mr. Michael Humphrey. The two men had begun arguing after a parking in an invalid spot.

Read More
822 Words | 4 Pages

On December 5, 1984, in the heart of New Orleans, the lives of two men made a wrong turn towards death. Ray Liuzza, a 34-year-old businessman, was recently promoted to Vice President of a hotel. To celebrate, he enjoyed the night on Bourbon Street. After a night of celebration, Liuzza returned to his apartment and robbed at gunpoint. He begged not to shoot, but the perpetrator shot Liuzza five times.

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

The New Jersey vs T.L.O. case is a controversial case that many people have different opinions about. This case led to many different opinions and thoughts about students privacy and rights at school. A New Jersey school district brought the case to the Supreme Court after the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the search planted on T.L.O. was against the Fourth Amendment. Well, actually the search was not against the Fourth Amendment. New Jersey’s search planted on T.L.O. was not against the Fourth Amendment.

Read More
963 Words | 4 Pages

New Jersey vs. T.L.O a case that came to court in 1985, a teacher from the Piscataway, New Jersey high school found two girls in a bathroom smoking. The teacher decided to take the two girls to the principal's office. The two girls knew each other from school. Since T.L.O did not admit to smoking, the principal demanded to see her purse and what was inside of it.

Read More
458 Words | 2 Pages

There also was no prosecution witnesses were not crossed examine. The due process was not followed, which lead to a short trial, and a quick verdict. This was the violation of the 5th Amendment because the right to due process.

Read More
925 Words | 4 Pages

Abdulrahman Zeitoun and Mumia Abu Jamal were two names I did not know. These two men have both undergone hardships and were both wrongly accused of crimes not committed. The comparison of these cases is hard due to the fact that Zeitoun’s case was not any type of legal and did not follow any type of normal or legal judicial proceedings. Jamal’s case however did follow judicial proceedings “legally”. The first case to point out was the fact that both of these men are innocent in my eyes.

Read More
581 Words | 3 Pages

He acknowledged the fact that there is a lot of prejudice going around. The judge told the jury to look at the facts. Sort through the lies and misinformations and go off of nothing but the truth. The jury is to go off of the information they have and not by what other people tell them to think, but to really look at the facts and evidence of the situation. This stood out because with all of this hate and racism going around, the judge wasn’t going to fool around with that.

Read More
1445 Words | 6 Pages

He was listed as a respondent to the challenge. At first the court case went through a three judge district court where it ruled that the law was constitutional. It was then appealed to the supreme court where they accepted the case. The supreme court ruled in an unanimous 8-0 decision that the law was unconstitutional.

Read More
861 Words | 4 Pages

There were a lot of amendments that were looked into during this case but the couple that mostly stood out were fifth and sixth amendments because they supported Miranda’s attorney and had not been told to Miranda while the whole integration period or before that time. The court made his final decision by ruling the case unconstitutional because it violated miranda’s

Read More
488 Words | 2 Pages

Scottsboro Argumentative Essay: Rough Draft Crimes happen everyday. Many criminals are incarcerated for their actions. Everyone has a different opinion on certain topics, everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as they know the true facts behind it. During the Scottsboro cases in the 1930’s, there were more people who thought of the accused to be guilty than innocent because of the unjust racism that had become a popular concept. Olen Montgomery was not guilty of raping 2 women.

Read More
972 Words | 4 Pages

He appealed his conviction and sentence to the Fourth District Court of Appeal and they affirmed that the Act does not violate any constitutionality challenged the defendant. Facts 1. The defendant committed to serve time for certain crimes and he was prison released in August 1996. 2.

Read More

More about Apprendi Vs New Jersey Case Study

Open Document