Case Brief Assignment: State v. Kelbel Monique Ramirez JS 143 Professor Peterson Case: State v. Kelbel Facts: Kyle John Kelbel was convicted of first-degree murder‚ past pattern of child abuse‚ in violation of Minnesota state statute section 609.185(5) and second-degree murder‚ in violation of Minnesota statute 609.19‚ subdivision 2(1). He was sentenced to life in prison for the death of Kailyn Marie Montgomery. Kelbel appealed‚ and argued that the district court failed to instruct
Premium Jury Law Murder
In Schenck v. United States‚ the Supreme Court keyed the famous “clear and present danger” test to determine when a state could constitutionally limit an individual’s free speech‚ under the first amendment. In finalizing the conviction of a man accused with disturbing the peace by handing out provocative flyers to draftees of the war‚ the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in certain ways‚ words can create a “clear and present danger” in a way that Congress may constitutionally disallow. While
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
convictions merged. Petitioner challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his robbery conviction. The COA addresses the following question: Did the Court of Special Appeals incorrectly interpret and apply this Court’s decision in Coles v. State‚ 374 Md. 114‚ 821 A.2d 389 (2003) and effectively eliminate the distinction between theft and robbery‚ when it held that the mere utterance‚ ‘don’t say nothing‚’ could satisfy the constructive force element of robbery where there was testimonial
Premium Evidence State Logic
THE DEMISE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Justice Ginsburg’s dissent in Herring v. United States suggested there is more to the exclusionary rule than just deterring police misconduct.[1] She explained that the rule was an “essential auxiliary” to the Fourth Amendment right‚ which is owed “a more majestic conception” due to the important purpose of preserving judicial integrity.[2] With this reference to judicial integrity‚ Justice Ginsburg and three of her colleagues reminded us of the importance of
Premium Law Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
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
Premium Firearm Crime Gun
The United States Constitution is one of the most significant documents in modern world history. Its official date of adoption was on the seventeenth of September in 1897. The Constitution itself represents the advent of democracy‚ justice and freedom in a once-was colony which thereafter gained its independence. It established three branches of government; the legislative branch‚ the judicial branch and the executive branch. Additionally‚ the Constitution outlined the relationship between the country’s
Premium United States Constitution United States Separation of powers
Directors who happen to work for more than forty hours in a week as demanded by law are entitled to compensation. This has to cover the amount of time and effort they have used to serve the organization or state agency to the best of their knowledge. Despite such directors being under the excluded job category‚ they still have to be paid for their services for having worked for extra hours. These directors‚ just like other categories of excluded employees are entitled to pay for having exceeded the
Premium Fair Labor Standards Act Overtime Working time
rule caused major controversy over why the rule even stands. The rule originated from the court case Weeks v. U.S. The Forth Amendment was virtually powerless until the early 1900s.
Premium Exclusionary rule Law Supreme Court of the United States
In recent years‚ we have seen more and more suicides related to cyber bullying then ever before. An example of this can be seen in the case of the United States v. Lori Drew. Lori was an older woman who pretended to be a teenaged boy and began to talk and soon after started an online relationship with a 14-year-old girl. The girl eventually began to fall for the fake 16-year-old boy that Lori Drew created
Premium Crime Internet Computer
Legal Brief: Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders Facts: • Pennsylvania State Police hired Nancy Drew Suders as a police communications operator. • Suder’s supervisors were Sergeant Eric D. Easton‚ Patrol Corporal William D. Baker‚ and Corporal Eric B. Prendergast. • Suders was subject to sexual harassment from all three of her supervisors during the term of her employment. • Easton would mention the subject of people having sex with animals each time Suders entered the office. • Easton told
Premium Employment Termination of employment Supreme Court of the United States