Case Brief: Maryland v. Pringle Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366, 124 S. Ct. 795 (2003) Facts: In Baltimore County, a car was stopped by a police officer for speeding in the early morning hour. The car was occupied by three men identified as Donte Partlow (driver/owner), Joseph Pringle (respondent/front-seat passenger), and Otis Smith (back-seat passenger). When the officer asked Partlow for his registration, he opened the glove compartment where the officer observed a large roll of money inside the compartment, later confirmed as $763. The officer asked Partlow for consent to search the vehicle, which he consented.
Worcester v. Georgia By Sydney Stephenson Worcester v. Georgia is a case that impacted tribal sovereignty in the United States and the amount of power the state had over native American territories. Samuel Worcester was a minister affiliated with the ABCFM (American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions). In 1827 the board sent Worcester to join its Cherokee mission in Georgia. Upon his arrival, Worcester began working with Elias Boudinot, the editor of the Cherokee Phoenix (the first Native American newspaper in the United States) to translate religious text into the Cherokee language. Over time Worcester became a close friend of the Cherokee leaders and advised them about their political and legal rights under the Constitution and federal-Cherokee treaties.
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER Plaintiff, Alicia Mandolin, submits these Points and Authorities in opposition to Defendant Elvin Evans's demurrer. STATEMENT OF FACTS In our case, Alicia Mandolin bought a 100-year-old house from Gerald Ross about a year ago. Ross bought the house from Elvin Evans, Evans told Ross that he had rewired the entire property and done a good job before selling the house to him. Evans lied, some portion of the property's wiring had been replaced but the majority of the wiring was not replaced.
Bath, N.Y. (WENY) -- In a few days Thomas Clayton will be sentenced for his role in orchestrating his wife 's death. However on Thursday, the attorney for the convicted murderer made his first motion for a new trial. Thomas Clayton appeared in a dark green prison jumpsuit, shackled at his hands and feet, as his attorney Ray Schlather argued against the expert testimony of cell phone analyst Sy Ray. Schalther said the jury got it wrong
Richard “Bobo” Evans (pg 174) Bobo is a criminal who has been arrested for breaking and entering, grand theft auto, and fighting a guy that he killed. He is currently serving time for selling drugs. Bobo testifies for the prosecution in order to shorten his sentence.
The court cases Goldberg and Wheeler do not stand for the proposition that only welfare benefits for people in extreme circumstances are entitled to pre-termination hearings. However, this is one situation where cutting off benefits with little or no notice could affect the well-being of the family or person. Any programs that offer they type of assistance people rely on to survive could benefit from pre-termination hearings, not just the welfare program. Welfare is one of the main public assistance programs, although I think housing assistance and food stamps might fall into the welfare category, they are also in need of a pre-termination hearing. In the Goldberg and Wheeler cases, California and New York did not want to give anyone a hearing
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, in 1969, problems arose when Brandenburg, a leader of a Klu Klux Klan, held a KKK meeting in an Ohio farm. In the convention Brandenburg was filmed as he complained about the United States suppressing the white race. For the most part the film was inaudible but it was certain that Brandenburg had stated some demeaning opinions on African Americans and Jews. In the assembly some Klu Klux Klan members were holding weapons. Though Brandenburg was not, he made it clear that violence would not take place unless it was necessary.
C. Precedent The law is unconstitutional not only due to the meaning of the text itself, but also from many cases of precedent. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) have already established the importance of the Second Amendment, but there are other cases as well that back up the courts decision claiming the ban on carrying a concealed weapon is unconstitutional. In Bliss v. Commonwealth, 2 Litt. 90, (KY 1822), established that the right to bear arms was for defense against themselves and the state. This case consisted of a man carrying a concealed weapon in his cane and it is similar to the one in which we face today.
In September of 1961, a woman from District of Columbia had an intruder break into her apartment. While the invader of the home was there, they had taken her wallet, and also raped the woman. During the investigation of the crime, the police had found some latent fingerprints in the apartment. The police then established and processed the prints. The prints were then connected back to 16 year old Morris A. Kent.
In 1989, former NSW police superintendent Harold James Blackburn was arrested and charged with 25 crimes under the Crimes Act 1900 which took place over a matter of nearly 20 years (New South Wales 1990). The charges included the crime of rape at Georges Hall in 1969 and sexual assault at Sutherland in 1985, as the Crimes Act 1900 had been updated during the periods of time that the alleged crimes took place (New South Wales 1990). When the case was presented to court in 1989, the Director of Public Prosecutions offered no evidence and the magistrate discharged Mr Blackburn on all charges (New South Wales 1990). A royal commission was established in 1990 to investigate the events and determine how an investigation could have failed to the
I believe Justice O’Connor’s plurality opinion of Jennifer Troxel et vir. V. Tommie Granville (802-803) was an example of a “good opinion.” The piece was both well-written and backed by appropriate precedent; O’Connor cited Meyer and Stanley v. Illinois, supra, observing, “[The] interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children [is] perhaps the oldest of the fundamental [due process] liberty interests recognized by this Court” (802). He additionally emphasized that the Court had not found Granville an unfit mother, nor had the Troxels accused her of being one when the case began. I find the majority opinion of Robin Joy Shahar v. Michael Bowers to be an example of a “bad opinion” for several reasons.
Eyewitness Bennett Barbour was a 22 year old, black male who was charged and convicted of rape in the state of Virginia. Barbour fought for over thirty years o clear his good name. Barbour was sentenced on for the alleged rape on April 15 of the same year. Bennett received a ten-year sentence for which he served four and a half years in prison. Barbour was exonerated on May 24, 2012.
GOSS v. LOPEZ, Supreme Court of the United States, 1975. 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. 729, 42, L.Ed.2d 725 deals with students that were suspended. The Columbus Ohio Public School System (CPSS) was sued by students. Nine students claimed that they were suspended without being given a hearing before their suspension, or even after their suspensions were over.
The year of 1965 the black community let out a collective victory cry. They had finally gotten the rights they fought hard for. They could at last vote, go to school and college, and got the working condition they deserve. They couldn 't have done it without Martin Luther King Jr., but there were a slew of cases that were tried and further assisted in opening the black community 's opportunity pool. They were well known cases, like the Plessy vs. Ferguson, Brown vs. Board of Education, and the Regents of the University vs. Bakke, all very influential cases in the fight for rights.
Honor is what is said to drive the decision for expulsion, but was it just for the school. The school’s response to plagiarism wasn’t unfair, although it seemed harsh the school did it with thought of the narrator and the school in mind. The line between healthy imitation and plagiarism can be drawn between someone claiming to be the story and someone
