Stacey McAlpine who helped Danny Heatley, a former Senator forward rebuild his career after a deadly car crash was charged with a lawsuit for defrauding his clients, Danny Heatley and Chris Philips and laundering the proceeds of the crime. In a statement by the lawsuit, Stacey McAlpine provided Danny Heatly with emotional support and advice during his recovery after the accident. At that time friendship flourished and Danny Heatley trusted and relied on Stacey. In the lawsuit filed at the court, Danny Heatly said that Stacey McAlpine represented him in his career as an NHL player before becoming his business adviser on a salary of $30 million a year.
As Lawyer Farrington said, Lou Dempsey was accused of illegally selling alcohol to the minor, Eric Howe. Mr. Dempsey failed to meet his responsibilities of asking for identification and anticipating violence and/or accidents caused from alcohol. The amount of alcohol that was given to Mr. Howe, allowed each member attending the party to dissipate their sobriety after drinking four standard cups.
A review of the events involving the North Charleston, S. Carolina Whitlee Jones murder case as it applies to the Tennessee “stand your ground” statute brings several factors into question. As indicated in the article, South Carolina’s law as does Tennessee’s states that a person having reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm can use deadly force on the unlawful intruder. However, this does not apply to a lawful resident or a person who has a legal right to be in the dwelling, business, or auto (Knapp, 2014). As Jones indicates she removes herself from the danger on several occasions, yet she continues to return, placing herself once again in position to receive serious injury or death from her boyfriend who is legally occupying the
Kaelea Tullly Moran v. Burbine Case When detained by the Police in Cranston, Rhode Island for breaking and entering Brian Burine was immediately given his Miranda Rights and he denied his right to a lawyer. Though the entire process the piece seemed to have obtained evidence they Mr. Burbine had committed a murder in near by providence Rhode Island. He confessed to the breaking and entering and tot the murder when he waved his rights. Because Mr. Burbine’s sister knew he had an appointment with a certain lawyer she called his office but he specifically was not available but his partner was.
(https://www.aclu.org/cases/united-states-v-carpenter) So the question is still open to debate. Did the police officers volatile Timothy 4th amendment and should that throw the ruling of the court? Or should the case go on because Timothy didn't know his right and gave up the information freely. You
Tennessee Volunteers Southeastern Conference (SEC) Eastern Division (2014 record: 7-6) Head Coach: Butch Jones Offense: The fact the defense played well in 2014 was offset by the fact the offense just never seemed to be able to get things going. They only averages 28.9 PPG to go with 370.5 YPG of offense. The reasons for this lethargic display of offense would have to be turnovers (22), inexperience and a general lack of explosiveness on the part of the skilled players.
Introduction McCloy considered the validity of provisions in Election Funding, Expenditures and Disclosed act 1981 (NSW) ("the EFED Act.") and it has been accepted that restrictions on donations to candidates and parties is constitutional. This paper analyses the implications of the McCloy for the implied freedom of political communication.
The police arrested Rubin Carter and John Artis because they fit the description given by Alfred Bello after the Lafayette Bar shooting. Their first right that was violated was “Detention or imprisonment” section 9 “Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.” John Artis and Rubin Carter were arrested for being “2 black men in a white car” as said by the policeman who detained them. The second right that was violated was “Arrest or detention” section 10 (a) “Everyone has the right on arrest or detention; (a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;” Carter and Artis were not informed promptly of the reason of their detention, in fact, when they were detained both men were taken to the hospital for the surviving
Introduction Clark Jerome McMillan was arrested and detained for rape and robbery with a deadly weapon of a 16- year- old female in 1980. McMillan served 22 years in prison but was sentenced to one hundred and nineteen years in prison for a crime he did not commit. On May 2, 2002, he became the hundred and eighth person in the United States to be exonerated due to post conviction DNA testing. The justice system was established to provide protection to the rights of all citizens and punish those that have committed a crime; however, the system has let down hundreds of innocent people such as Clark McMillan. Tennessee has no law requiring recorded interrogations.
Where there was no probable cause to arrest Hayes, no consent to go to the police station, and no prior judicial authorization for detaining him, the investigative detention at the station for fingerprinting purposes violated Hayes rights under the Fourth Amendment, as made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. Reasoning: The police without a warrant or probable cause removed a subject from his home and transported him to the police station, where he was not free to go, although he was there briefly for questioning, In addition fingerprinted him.
“Riley v. California”) Bensur and Brokamp say in their article that in court, Riley claimed that his Fourth Amendment right was violated because the officers did not have probable cause also called reasonable suspicion to examine his phone. The case went to the Supreme Court and the judges agreed that the police had acted
v. Moscatiello where police lawfully entered a warehouse and in the process discovered drugs, they left the compound as they found it, got a warrant and returned and arrested the suspect for drug possession (Samaha page 393). The court held that the unlawfully entry didn’t help find the drugs (Samaha page 393). Even though the police were in good standing it still shows the law and constitution were fundamentally violated when the police violated Moscatiello fourth amendment right to unlawful search and seizure (Samaha page 393). This case shows that the police can enter a person’s home look around find something leave and come back legally and take what they found while they were searching illegally as long as they can show they would have found it anyway (Samaha page 393). Again if those tasked with keeping the law don’t follow it what is the incentive for the average Joe to follow
As citizens of America, we are taught to believe that we are going to be protected by the police and the constitution. In reality the police that are on beat and the courts are finding ways to violate our constitutional rights. Police are finding ways to violate our fourth amendment rights in such ways that makes civilians second guessing whether they are here to serve and protect or just to meet a certain quota. Stop and frisk was implemented to stop the crimes that are on the streets but, instead they are causing racial profiling by the police to African Americans and Latinos. The police are over using and abusing “Stop and Frisk” so they can make arrest and to put fear into young adult’s life.
The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is not to completely stop the police, because the amendment can be waived if an officer has a warrant, or a person’s consent. The Fourth Amendment states that generally a search or seizure is illegal unless there is a warrant, or special circumstances. Technically stating that a citizen is protected by the Fourth Amendment, until a government employee gets a warrant, and then they can invade a citizen’s privacy. Also people state that the FISA Court’s warrants are constitutional, but the NSA’s surveillance is unconstitutional. Even though people do not like the NSA’s surveillance, the NSA is legal because the FISA Court that the people did not mind makes it legal.
In addition, the law enforcement only needs to be “supported by a probable cause” or an “arrest warrant,” to search a United States citizen. Although, the police officer could arrest a suspect to stop them from running away or to preserve evidence. Besides the Fourth Amendment is still beneficial for all United States
