urgent for racial justice advocates today than ensuring that America’s current racial caste system is its last.” – Michelle Alexander‚ The New Jim Crow In The New Jim Crow‚ Michelle Alexander (2010) describes an American paradigm that encourages pervasive racial injustices that are beyond average comprehension. In particular‚ the “New Jim Crow” is a system that predicates current racial differences on past social constructs that relate and date back to slavery and the Civil Rights
Premium United States Race African American
Mitch Carlson Steve Russell CRIM 331 Case Brief #1 Salinas v. Texas Facts & History On the morning of December 18‚ 1992‚ two brothers were shot and killed in their Houston home. Police were called by a neighbor who heard the gunshots‚ and then seen a “dark colored” car fleeing from the house. It was later found out that defendant‚ Genovevo Salinas‚ was at the residence where the murders took place the night before December 18th. When officers went to Salinas’ house‚ they arrived to a dark blue
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Miranda v. Arizona
Angela jackson Ap government 9 September 2014 Riley v. California In the case of Riley v California the defendant and petitioner David Leon Riley was arrested August 22‚ 2009‚ after a traffic stop which resulted in the finding of loaded guns in car. The officer stopped riley searched him and took hold of his phone and then searched through messages‚ contacts‚ and photos. The officer charged Riley with an unrelated shooting that had taken place
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Mobile phone
Court Brief Miranda v. Arizona Citation: Miranda v. State of Arizona; Westover v. United States; Vignera v. State of New York; State of California v. Stewart‚ Supreme Court of the United States‚ 1966. Issue: Whether the government is required to notify the arrested defendants of their Fifth Amendment constitutional rights against self-incrimination before they interrogate the defendants. Relief Sought: Miranda was violated the 5th Amendments right to remain silent and his 6th Amendment right
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Both‚ Madame Loisel and the daughter from two kinds‚ find themselves in similar situations. The situations seem different but in reality they aren’t‚ as both of them are expected to do certain things‚ the only different is that the daughter from to kinds in forced to do thing and Madame Loisel just feel like she had to do or to have a certain thing. The difference in the expectations between the two characters‚ is made by making one character want a certain thing‚ and the other to be forces to do
Premium
[1893] 1 Q.B. 256 1892 WL 9612 (CA)‚ [1893] 1 Q.B. 256 (Cite as: [1893] 1 Q.B. 256) Page 1 *256 Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. In the Court of Appeal. CA Lindley‚ Bowen and A. L. Smith‚ L.JJ. 1892 Dec. 6‚ 7. Contract--Offer by Advertisement--Performance of Condition in Advertisement-- Notification of Acceptance of Offer--Wager--Insurance--8 & 9 Vict. c. 109-- 14 Geo. 3‚ c. 48‚ s. 2. The defendants‚ the proprietors of a medical preparation called "The Carbolic Smoke Ball‚" issued an
Premium Contract Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
Marbury v. Madison On President John Adam’s last day in office‚ March 4 he appointed forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia as an attempt by the federalists to take control of the judiciary before Thomas Jefferson took office. The commissions were signed and sealed by President Adams‚ but they were not delivered before the expiration of Adams’s presidency. Jefferson‚ the president succeeding Adams‚ refused to uphold the new judicial
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Marbury v. Madison United States Constitution
Terry v. Ohio‚ 392 U.S. 1 (1968) Facts of the Case An police officer by the name of Mcfadden observed two men standing at a street corner. He noticed that the two men would take turns on looking inside of the window store. This happenedd about twenty four times and each time they did it the two men would have a conversation. After a while a third guy had joined the duo and then left. After the detective witnessed that action he had suspected that they were casing the store to burglarize the
Premium Terry v. Ohio United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd (Salomon) has created an impressive case in English Law history. The decision of the House of Lords in Salomon has reaffirmed the separate legal personality of a company. A separate legal personality is also known as the corporate personality. It is one of the consequences of the Company Act 2006 which incorporated a sole trader company to a limited company. When a company has undergone incorporation‚ it simply means that the shareholders of the company are separated
Premium Corporation Limited liability
1. Name of the Case: Linda W illiamson v. City of Houston‚ Texas‚ 148 F.3d 462‚ 1998. 2. Facts: In 1990‚ Linda Williamson‚ a police officer with the City of Houston Police Department‚ was assigned to the Organized Crime Squad. Officer Doug McLeod‚ another member of this squad‚ began sexually harassing her on a daily basis and this behavior lasted for approximately 18 months. The harassing behavior occurred in front of other police officers‚ including the officers’ supervisor‚ Sergeant Bozeman. McLeod’s
Premium Police Appeal Constable