Appellate court

lecture (2011), a plea bargain is when a defendant pleads guilty to their offence to receive a less harsh punishment. There has been much controversy over this procedure due to its ethical and legal implications. In a very controversial case, Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622 (2002), it was expressed that to receive a plea agreement, the defendant waives the right to know all evidence against him. This…

The 1931 Al Capone Case of Al Capone could be described as an attempt to prosecute whatever will stick. More specifically, Linder states that a man who could not be punished for murder, is later punished for tax-evasion (Linder “All Capone Trial (1931): An Account”). However, the trial itself was not easy. More specifically, the witnesses needed to be made up of individuals who would turn on Capone (Linder “All Capone Trial (1931): An Account”). Even more so, Capone attempted to influence the…

Courtroom participants most have professional standards when serving the public. In Kenneth Olsen’s case the prosecution withheld information. In Brian Adcok case there was ineffective assistance of his counsel. In Judge Amanda F. Williams her court room was not properly ran. Because of theses misconduct, two defendants in these cases were able to appeal their court’s decision. Misconduct of any kind can set guilty criminal free and innocent people to jail. It also shows that there is…

In addition, there are approximately 350 municipal courts operating locally. There are two appellate-level courts: the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. Judicial Council of Georgia (2015) educates, in criminal matters magistrates hold preliminary hearings, state courts conduct preliminary hearings in criminal cases, and municipal courts handle preliminary hearings. American Bar Association. (n.d.) shares, a prosecutor ordinarily relies on police…

trial without counsel. Dietrich had applied to the Legal Aid Commission of Victoria, who rejected his claim on the grounds that he was not willing to plead guilty to the charges. He felt this went against his rights and appealed his case to the High Court of Australia. 3 What role did the individual or group play in taking…

P.2d 1124 (Okla. Civ. App. 1993). In most instances, an employee traveling either to or from work is not considered to be acting within the scope of their employment. Id.; Skinner v. Braum’s Ice Cream Store, 890 P.2d 922 (Okla. 1995). However, the court has recognized exceptions to the “coming and going” rule. An employee is acting within the scope of employment when the employer instructs the employee to render a service or complete a task or if the trip would confer an incidental benefit to…

VITALY TARASOFF et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA et al., Defendants and Respondents S.F. No. 23042 Supreme Court of California 17 Cal. 3d 425; 551 P.2d 334; 131 Cal. Rptr. 14; 1976 Cal. LEXIS 297; 83 A.L.R.3d 1166 Superior Court of Alameda County, No. 405694, Robert L. Bostick, Judge. Introduction The plaintiffs are the parents of the deceased Tatiana Tarasoff accused the defendants Gold,Moore, Powelson, Yandell, and the Regents of the…

in a contract disagreement between parties. The plaintiffs in the case were Roberto Basulto and Raquel Gonzalez, whom were husband and wife and considered by the courts to be “the buyers”. On the other hand, the defendant in the case was Hialeah Automotive, LLC, who also went by the name of Potamkin Dodge, and was considered by the courts to be “the dealership” (Basulto v. Hialeah, 2014). In 2004, Basulto and Gonzalez purchased from Hialeah Automotive a 2005 Dodge Caravan. According to the…

the lower courts should be upheld, and 2, judges Curt and Dan, saying that the decision should be reversed, but when I include the opinion of the 5th judge, it shifts the outlook of the case toward reversing the decision of the lower courts. Yet, which of these opinions are the majority and dissenting opinions? There…

Marshall was the main suspect, even though a lack of evidence, because “…he shared what [the Commission believed] was a general sense in Sydney’s White community at the time that Indians were not ‘worth’ as much as Whites” (AIDWYC, 2014). At trial, the Court depended on the evidence of two teenage would-be eyewitnesses, Maynard Chant (who was on probation at the time) and John Pratico (whose psychiatrist later testified that he was prone to self-congratulatory delusions) (AIDWYC, 2014).…