Bravo Fernandez v. United States is a court case that deals with Double Jeopardy. Double Jeopardy can be defined as “the prosecution of a person twice for the same offense (dictionary.com). ” Bravo Fernandez v. United States was argued on October 4th, 2016, because of an incident that took place in May of 2005. Mr. Fernandez, whom is the president of a private security firm in Puerto Rico, and Hector Martinez-Maldonado who is a member of the Senate. Both traveled to Las Vegas to watch a boxing match. Mr. Fernandez and Mr. Martinez-Maldonado were indicted for the trips payment. The charges were violation of the federal bribery statute, conspiracy, and the Travel Act. These charges tied Mr. Martinez-Maldonado’s support of legislation beneficial…
In July of 2000 Curtis Williams was indicted by a grand jury in Williamson County, Texas for aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury. While under indictment, Williams traveled to Louisiana from Texas on a Greyhound bus. The bus Williams was traveling on was scheduled to make a stop at the Shreveport Greyhound Bus terminal on September 12,…
King’s attorney argued that the warrantless search and seizure of the evidence within the apartment violated his client’s fourth amendment rights. The attorney then filed a motion to suppress the evidence which he claimed was illegally obtained. The court found that the warrantless entry was justified due to exigent circumstances which the officers encountered when they approached the apartment. These circumstances included the strong odor presence of marijuana, failure to respond to the door, and the movement which sounded consistent with the destruction of evidence.…
Wisconsin v. Avery is a major case between Steven A. Avery and the state of Wisconsin. Steven Avery was born on July 9, 1962 and grew up in a very small area knows as Manitowoc county in the state of Wisconsin. His family owns an auto salvage yard where abandoned vehicles are obtained for the sale of parts. Avery was not a smart man, his IQ was seventy and he “barely functioned in school”. He had a very rough childhood and he turned to crime through his teens and into his twenties. In 1981, Avery and and his friend were charged with burglary at a local bar and were each sentenced to two years in…
Whether helping customers to fill out government forms is an act of engaging in unauthorized practice of law for paralegals?…
The Court ruled against King stating that the officers were justified in their actions to prevent the loss of evidence in the case. King entered a conditional guilty plea, and appealed to the Kentucky Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals decided to uphold the judgement of the of the previous court. The appeals court believed that officers had probable cause to conduct a search without a warrant because of the exigent circumstances and their fear of the possible destruction of evidence, and the failure of King and other to answer the door when they knocked and announced their identity. The trial went on to the Kentucky Supreme Court where the decision of the lower court was reversed, because it believed that any evidence obtained from the search was the result of unconstitutional behavior by the police officers. They believed that officers should have reasonably understood that their actions leading up into the bust (banging on the door and announcing “police) would have been enough of a catalyst to cause the individuals in the apartment to destroy evidence. The Kentucky Supreme Court sought the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court due to the split of opinion between the state and the federal courts, regarding the weight of exigent…
In the case of Smith v. United States, the plaintiff, John Angus Smith, was convicted of engaging in drug-trafficking, which would have granted him a five year sentence had he not “used” a firearm in regards to the incident. As stated in statute 924(c)(1), the use of firearm in relations to a drug-trafficking crime enhanced the sentence, and turned it into a 30-year sentence. The argument at hand is whether the term “use” was to be taken from a broad dictionary definition or in the ordinary meaning. The majority of the court argued that the term “use” should not be limited to the intended use of the firearm (as a weapon) as they exemplified cases of which the firearm was used as a bludgeon even though that was not it’s intended purpose, yet…
4)The case we read in class that I enjoyed the most was State of Connecticut v. Cardwell. I primarily liked it because it best exemplifies the difference and complexity regarding the sale of goods and the helps reflect the distinction between a “shipment” and “destination” contracts. I disagree with the trial courts judgment that Cardwell sold tickets within Connecticut and thereby violated Connecticut statute. However, I agree with the judgment of the court after the appeal. The transfer of goods occurred in Massachuestes, therefore the sale of the tickets, as defined by the code, occurred in Massachusts.…
It was determined that the plaintiffs failed to show any part of the statute led to a denied admission to any non public school on racial or religious grounds. So the complaint of violating the 14th amendment was not discussed and dismissed for lack of standing.…
McWilliams V Dunn Supreme Court of the United States Introduction The Dunn v. McWilliams case is a famous court case that was heard before the supreme court of United States in April 24, 2017. The case involved James McWilliams as the petitioner against Jefferson Dunn was the commissioner and was representing the Alabama department of corrections. The focus of the case was the sixth amendment of the US constitution was useful in providing for the right to the assistance of an attorney to represent them in defense. However the oral arguments in the case pointed out that it was unclear on whether the defendant’s right to an attorney allows for him to an independent expert who would be devoted in advocating specifically for the defense’s case.…
The first amendment in the Bill of Rights states “Congress shall make no law respecting…
The respondent was convicted in Dallas County Criminal Court of desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute. He was sentenced to one year in prison and fined $2000. The respondent appealed his conviction through the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas. They affirmed the decision of the lower court. The respondent then petitioned for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This court then reversed the decision finding Johnson’s flag burning to be “symbolic speech” protected by the First Amendment. Certiorari was granted. The case went to the Supreme Court.…
In this examination of United States v. Warshak 631 F.3d 266 (6th Cir. 2010), the primary focus will be on the constitutional issues regarding this case. First, an analysis of the defendant’s expectation of privacy, regarding e-mail communication. Next, an examination of the government argument concerning the potential invasion of the defendant’s Fourth Amendment right to privacy. Finally, an analysis of the case’s conclusion, and how the Stored Communication Act factored into the constitutionality of more than 27,000 items of e-mail evidence.…
In the case of United States V. Parks, I think he should’ve been charged for the criminal offense of negligence. I understand that he believed he had designated competent employees to take charge of ensuring the proper sanitation of the warehouse and its products, however, he admitted at trial of having knowledge of unsanitary working conditions in one of his warehouses thanks to a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Failing to take corrective action is also a violation of ethics, because there is no question of how many health diseases can be obtained through rodent contamination. He consciously allowed the manufacturing of contaminated food products, with complete disregard of human health. The Government used the…
Fill in the notes for the landmark case you selected to connect with your topic in the previous lessons. You may use the official court documents for the case and articles written about the case to fill in the required information below.…