Recommended: Conclusions on good samaritan law
In a retributive justice system, the state is tasked with bringing Blanco-Garcia to justice. The state will accuse Blanco-Garcia of murdering Vanessa Pham and hold an adversarial trial to determine whether he is guilty of the crime or not. An appointed defense attorney (DA) will represent Blanco-Garcia at trial. Due process demands that the defendant is afforded legal representation to argue matters of law on his behalf as well as to protect the defendant’s other due process rights. Likewise, the state will also be represented by a legal agent, the commonwealth attorney (CA).
The Supreme Court decision in Mapp v. Ohio was very controversial. It changed how handle evidence and forced police officers to take special precautions when obtaining evidence. In the case of Mapp, Mapp 's attorneys argued that the obscene material found in Mapp’s house had been unlawfully seized and should not be allowed as evidence. Prior to Mapp’s trial the Supreme Court had ruled in Weeks vs the United States that illegally obtained evidence was not permissible in Federal Court. But did this same principle apply to states?
This court case was about a man named Tim Hennis who murdered a mother whose name was Kathryn Eastburn and 2 of her daughters. The prosecution was The State Of Kansas and the Defense was Tim Hennis. They were arguing about if Tim was the killer of Mrs. Eastburn and her daughters. The facts of the case was that he was seen by a witness confessed to being there the night of the murder. The prosecutors are The State Of Kansas they believe that Tim Hennis raped and killed the mother and her two daughters.
Issue Case name: State of Oregon vs Kenneth James Harris, October 19th, 2017 Facts of the case: In the case there were two parties, one party including the defendant, Kenneth James Harris, and the State of Oregon. The dispute is based on the state of Oregon issuing a subpoena for the witness to come to trial for the case of the defendant, however, the witness failed to do so and was unavailable. The defendant argued that the only way the witness is unavailable is if the state did everything in their power to try to get the witness to court. The only thing the state did was provide the victims recording of the 9-1-1 call from the incident. Issue: Could the State of Oregon done more to produce the witness at trial?
The Supreme Court ordered that such “deliberate indifference” to an inmate 's “serious medical needs” was a violation of that inmate 's Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. This case guaranteed three basic rights: the right to access to care, the right to care that is ordered, and the right to professional medical judgment.
This posed two main Constitutional questions: Do non-capital felony defendants still get the sixth amendment?s right to counsel in state courts? Should all states have to provide counsel in their courts for indigent defendants just as federal courts do, no matter what type of case it may be? (Street Law, 2012) The case of Gideon v. Wainwright helped bring into light and define the full rights of the accused. Through dealing with the sixth amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, it focused on the key aspect of appointing counsel for any defendant, and made one way our country handles criminal justice synonymous between state and federal
Likewise, Plaintiff also fails state a claim against
The federal courts have stated on numerous occasions that absent unusual circumstances they will not intervene in the internal administration of state prison systems.”). In Plaintiff’s opposition, he argues that the second cause of action is not a Section 1983 claim, but a claim for “negligence under state law constituting a tort.” However, even accepting that as true, Plaintiff failed to comply with NRS 41.031. NRS 41.031
Scotts extended stay in Illinois a free state gave him legal standing . Scott never made his claim while living in the free state
The Baker Act The Florida Mental Health Act, also known as ‘Baker Act’ was enacted in 1971. The Baker act oversees mental health services including voluntary and involuntary admissions (Florida Supreme Court, 2018 ). The purpose of this legislature is “to protect the rights and liberty interests of citizens with mental illnesses and ensure public safety” (Florida Supreme Court, n.d). According to Mr. Baker, the founder of the act, the original intent was to encourage voluntary commitments, distinguish differences between hospitalization and legal incompetency, and community health care among individuals with mental illnesses (Florida Supreme Court, n.d). The involuntary admissions criterion for the Baker acts allows any inpatient treatment facility to hold someone in custody up to 72 hours for
An array of difficulties may arise when it comes to victims receiving the necessary care from medical professionals, there might be a lack of available resources that provides case management services as well as after care services for individuals that desire such help. Also the
Constitutional Concerns Fourth Amendment Overview The constitutional concerns that surround home visits in the United States stem from the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (“Fourth Amendment”). The Fourth Amendment states that “[the] right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” As a result of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment stretches to government action on a state level.
In discussions of the Bystander Law, one controversial issue with bystanders in our society today is if one person doesn 't react and there is two other people with them, the other two won 't react. For people who don’t know the definition of a bystander, it means a person who is present at an event or incident but doesn’t respond. Why follow someone else when you can be an individual? People who believe that we as individuals shouldn’t have the law, but the reason that people wouldn’t follow the law if we enforce it. On the other hand, those who believe that our own selves should have the law contend that there should be consequences.
If the hospital was that close to the school more time would have been wasted by calling in a life star helicopter. The first responders handled this situation in the best way that they could by transporting the victims by ambulance. “Ambulances were already there. Using an ambulance minimizes the movement of the patient calling for a helicopter would take more time. The ambulance was quicker and safer (West).”
This aspect is concerned with the powers that be placing the defendant on trial, and proving that a law had been violated by
