1. What is the most “jealously” protected kind of speech, according to the court in this case? (3 points)…
The court ruled against Fox Associates. Was the court correct? Do you think Fox should have done its own background check? Why or Why not?…
In 1963 Clarence Earl Gideon presented himself in front of the Supreme Court. Gideon had been indicted for breaking and entering; after defending himself in his preliminary trial he was sentenced to five years in prison. During his time in jail, Gideon did some research on law and wrote an appeal to the Supreme Court. Gideon’s request of representation was on behalf of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court decided to put the case on trial; it related back to the Betts v. Brady case of 1942. Unlike Betts v. Brady’s 6-3 ruling in which Betts had lost, Gideon won the case with an astounding 9-0 majority. The main issue of the case centers on proper representation of the defendant. In order for the reader to fully understand the scope of the case, he or she needs to consider Betts v. Brady.…
The question in the matter now is whether or not the statistical study was able to prove that McCleskey’s sentence violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court held an…
Abel Fields was then convicted under the Stolen Valor Act, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $1,000. However, Fields appealed his decision arguing that the act was unconstitutional because his rights to free speech has been violated. His argument is completely invalid because his lies were made intentionally so it should not be protected. Fields should still be convicted since he has never…
In the groundbreaking case Gideon vs. Wainwright we are given a prime example of a Supreme Court case and its impact on federalism. Gideon was accused of felony burglary charges after an eyewitness placed him at the scene of a robbery. Although there was no evidence of him committing the crime, police arrested him and charged him with the theft based solely on an eye witness report. The sequences of events that would follow would change the way states were ordered to provide due process and create a fair and balanced trial for all felony trials.…
After doing research about the Aaron Feuerstein case, he thinks he was doing the right things even he has to…
References: O’Hare, P., Lezon, D., Ellison, D., Markley, M., Ruiz, R., & Villafranca, A. (2006). The Andrea Yates Case: Not Guilty, But Not Free. Houston Chronicle.com. Retrieved August 21, 2011 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=9&sid=2&scrchmode=1&vinst…
If I was deciding the case, Clark v. Arizona, I would rule not guilty by reason…
Abel Fields was a 39-year-old California resident who claimed he served in the military and received a purple heart at a city meeting he attended for public safety. Each one of Abel Field’s claims were false. He had not served in the military and had not received a purple heart. He was prosecuted and convicted under the Stolen Valor Act. The Stolen Valor Act states that it is a crime to make false claims about receiving military medals and awards. The law stated, “fraudulent claims surrounding the receipt of the Medal of Honor, the distinguished-service cross, the Navy cross, the Air Force cross, the Purple Heart, and other decorations and medals awarded by the President or the Armed Forces of the United States” (Stolen Valor Act of 2005). Consequently, the nature of his crime broke the law and he was fined $1,000. In its past decisions, the Supreme Court has reminded us that there are “categories of speech . . . fully outside the protection of the first amendment” (United States v. Stevens, 2010). In Gertz v. Robert Welch, the Supreme Court opinion claimed that protecting false speech constitutionally might damage this…
Stewart, through his new appointed attorneys (paid for by a non-profit anti-death penalty organization), has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the federal district court for the District of Arizona. Among other arguments, Stewart claims that his rights were violated by Arizona because information and testimony was used against him that related to his confidential discussions with his then attorney, James Careful. The state claims that the use of the confidential communication with his attorney was proper in this case.…
Linder, Douglas O. (2005). The Trial of John Brown: A Commentary. Retrieved from http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/brownaccount.html. On August 6, 2012.…
In response, the still angry Johnson appealed his case to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This court, unlike the previous two, found Johnson to be innocent because it found that the First Amendment protected Johnson's behavior. To arrive at this decision, the court first quickly decided that Johnson's actions feel under the First Amendment protection of free speech because it was expressive conduct. Because of this, the state would need to prove that circumstances existed which would make the state interest outweigh the First Amendment. The court found that there was not a strong enough state interest to overrule the protection of the First Amendment and overturned the previous ruling. Upset with this, The State of Texas appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the…
1) What is the most “jealousy” protected kind of speech, according to the court in this case? (3 points)…
The plaintiff being the state represented by the District Attorney was right in their determination to hold somebody liable for these actions. Had there not been an…