trials where criminal defendant is considered as guilty or not guilty. So‚ at first glance it looks unavoidable that all criminals are punished according and in proportion to their crimes. In fact‚ there is another way of judging and punishing criminals that does not include jury trials and fair judicial process that finds defendant guilty or not guilty. This system is called plea bargaining. A plea bargain is an agreement in a criminal case whereby the prosecutor offers the defendant the opportunity
Premium Jury Jury trial United States Constitution
state of Kansas has defined a sequence of events in processing criminal cases where each action encompasses a specific function. Whether it is the police officer who investigates the crime‚ the prosecutor who must gather the facts for action‚ the defendant who must obtain a lawyer and prove their case‚ or the judge and jury who determine the fate of the offender; having a basic understanding of the law is imperative in protecting individual rights. Within this paper I will discuss the Kansas state
Premium Criminal law Felony Crime
case the judgement concluded that the defendant was not guilty due to the defendant not been proven to have the specific intent required for to be charged with assault. Another criterion of assault is the defendant having to put the claimant in immediate unlawful fear. Stephen v Myers 18302 was a case that in which the defendant was found guilty for coming at the claimant with a clutched fist‚ while the defendant’s friends held the defendant back. The defendant was found guilty because he put the claimant
Premium Negligence Tort Tort law
Luxford (the vendors). • First defendant is Mrs Sidhu (the purchaser). • Second defendant is PA & NA Johnson Pty Ltd. • Third defendant is Johnson Prestige Realty Pty Ltd. • Fourth defendant is David Michael Johnson. • Cross defendants are Peter Michael McBride and Anna Maria Bernadette Marano. • Contracts were exchanged on 2 May 2005 for the purchase of property for $2‚130‚000 between the plaintiffs and the first defendant. • Contract of sale to be completed
Premium Contract Real estate Real property
constitute a legal action against some one’s negligence‚ several requirements to be fulfilled. First one is that there must exist some duty of care towards the plaintiff by the defendant. The second one is that the defendant should breach such duty of care imposed on him. The third one is that the negligence done by the defendant should be the cause of the harm resulted to the plaintiff. The fourth one is that the harm should have some monetary value. In Haynes V Harwood (1935) 1 KB 146 at 152‚ Judge
Premium Tort Law Negligence
Generally‚ exculpatory agreements otherwise valid are not construed to cover the more extreme forms of negligence-wilful‚ wanton‚ reckless‚ or gross. Winterstein v. Wilcom‚ 16 Md.App. 130‚ 136 (1972). II. Statement of Undisputed Material Facts 1. Defendant Arturo Gomez is the fencing coach at Crowell and at all times relevant to this matter acted as Crowell’s servant. 2. Crowell provides weapons and electronic
Premium Legal terms Judgment Public policy
skull’ rule and whether the refusal to take lifesaving medical treatment breaks the chain of causation that exists between the defendant’s wrongdoing and the purported outcome of that wrongdoing. The facts of the case are as follows - Blaue‚ the defendant‚ stabbed a woman numerous times after she refused to have sexual intercourse with him. She was a Jehovah’s Witness and was therefore not in favour of blood transfusions. After the stabbing‚ she was taken to a hospital and was told that she urgently
Premium Religion Causality Blood transfusion
own explanation based on the evidence provided by both sides. M. Warren was talking about how she was broken and sick‚ which in a way contradicted her whole idea on the defendant being guilty because if the defendant is sick then there is something wrong with her that she can’t control. Based on the defense’s statement the defendant was sick with battered women’s syndrome which influenced her thoughts. As I came up with my own decision on whether she was guilty or innocent‚ I thought about how battered
Premium Law Jury Crime
• Synonymous with carelessness did not intend to cause harm to Plaintiff • To determine whether negligence exists‚ must ask: 1. Was the Defendant’s conduct unreasonable? 2. Did the Defendant cause the Plaintiff’s injury? Elements of Negligence: 1. Duty by the Defendant to the Plaintiff 2. Defendant breached the duty of reasonable care 3. Defendant’s actions were the proximate cause (nearest cause/ number of factors that collectively caused the Plaintiff’s injuries) or actual cause (specific
Premium Tort Tort law
that did the surgery (Defendants) for product liability for an implanted medical device that failed six years after his surgery in 1986. Cafazzo had surgery for the implantation of a mandibular prosthesis. Cafazzo sued the hospital (Defendant) and the surgeon (Defendant) under strict product liability. Cafazzo’s suit was based on that the product was defectively designed and lacked any warning necessary to ensure safety. The product manufacturer‚ Vitek‚ was not named defendant because by that time
Premium Physician Surgery Medicine