Even when Michael’s new defense team, through the innocence project, found a crime that was eerily similar to the method of murder and subsequent events to the one that Michael was convicted of, the new prosecutor in Williamson County fought hard to keep DNA testing from taking place, even stating that they objected to the testing now because the defense hadn’t requested it before (Morton, 2014). There was further evidence of ineffectiveness in that the coroner who’d changed his estimated time of death between the autopsy and trial, had come under scrutiny for his findings in this case, as well as several others, with claims of gross errors “including one case where he came to the conclusion that a man who’d been stabbed in the back had committed suicide” (Morton, 2014). This was only one of the many injustices that were committed against Michael Morton throughout his trial. In August of 2006, the defense was finally granted permission to perform DNA testing on the items that had been taken from his wife’s body (Morton, 2014). Although this testing did not reveal any information about the guilty party, it did at least give Michael the knowledge that Chris was not sexually violated before or after her death (Morton,
On May 12, 1983, Suzanne Figueroa was abducted at gunpoint in a child care center’s parking lot after dropping off her child. Subsequently, Figueroa was sexually assaulted and sliced with a knife. Suzanne and her husband, Luis Figueroa, sued North Park, the child center operator doing business at Evangelical Covenant Church, for negligent failure to provide adequate parking lot security. After the district court ruled against the Figueroas, they appealed the case arguing material issues of fact exist to prove the Evangelical Covenant Church owed them a duty of protection. The appeals court disagreed and affirmed the district court’s judgment.
Title: Chimel v. California Date/Court: United States Supreme Court, 1969 Facts: This case deals with Ted Chimel, who they suspected robbed a local coin shop. On September 13, 1965, several officers from Santa Ana came to the home of Chimel with an arrest warrant for his expected involvement in the burglary. The officers arrived at the door and identified themselves to Chimel’s wife and asked if they could come into the home, she agreed and showed them into the house. While in the house the officers waited 10-15 minutes until Chimel came home from work.
Continuing onto the second case I have researched. This case is titled People v. Nothnagel 187 Cal. App. 2d 219; 9 Cal. Rptr. 519; 1960 Cal.
Troy Davis went to court and it only took them a few hours of to plead that he was guilty. While the police officers were interviewing the witnesses of crime scene. Dorothy Fara was one of the witnesses for Troy Davis she told them she really did not see what happens. The police officer was then pressuring her to say that she saw Troy Davis do it. The police officer were putting her under so much pressure on her she felt if she did not say what they wanted to hear she would not have been able to leave.
The Case The case involved the shooting of five friends in a house during an armed robbery. One of the witnesses Larry Boatner stated that he was at a friend’s house shortly after Juan Smith and two other people entered the house. They demanded money and drugs which resulted in the shooting that left five of Larry’s friends dead. During the trial Boatner identified Smith as one of the gunmen who entered the house where the shooting took place.
The Supreme Court stated the proof could not be used against the person in state courts and that Dollree Mapp could not be convicted. Mapp was released and her case helped to strengthen the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The matter also limited police power. I agree with the final outcome of the case. I would say the Supreme Court made the right decision with the information given.
The case Furman v Georgia made it all the to the supreme court because it would affect the way the whole country delivered punishment. Although it surprised many people that it made it that far because most people were for capital punishment. Michael Meltsner said,”Georgia was a shock. Before LDF's anti-capital punishment campaign, there had been no successful court challenge of the death penalty — even when it had been handed down in a blatantly racist or totally arbitrary manner” (www.michealmeltsner.com/interview.html). .
Case Gone Wrong: Anthony vs State of Florida Case No. 5D11-2357 If ever there was a botched case it was this one with inconsistencies on the part of the State being overwhelming. I watched this trial intently and read everything available.
Back in 1975, there was a major case called, Payton V. New York. Theodore Payton was suspected of murdering a gas station manager, they found evidence within his home that connected him with the crime. What caused the problem was the fact New York had a law that allowed unwarranted searches if the person was a suspect. Based off the oral argument presented by Oyez, the police said it didn't count as the evidence because it was in public view when entering the home. It had to be appealed before it was determined as unconstitutional.
The court case I have selected is the Roper vs. Simmons case. Christopher Simmons (17) came up with the idea to murder Shirley Cook. Simmons brought this brought this idea to his two friends Charles Benjamin (15) and John Tessmer (16) and
Title: Schneckloth v. Bustamonte Date/Court: The United States Supreme Court, 1973 Facts: This case deals with Clyde Bustamonte, who tried to defraud a check. At 2:40 a.m. local Sunnyvale Police Officer James Rand stopped a vehicle that had a burnt out headlight and license plate light. When Officer Rand approached the vehicle he found that the individuals Joe Alcala, Bustamonte, and Joe Gonzales were in the front seat. In the rear of the vehicle Officer Rand saw three older gentlemen, Officer Rand then asked the driver if he had identification and the driver (Gonzales) did not have any. Rand then asked the other individuals in the car and only Alcala had a valid license, after producing his license Alcala told the officer that the car was his brothers.
Griswold V. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 (1965) Facts: The two appellants Griswold and Buxton were both arrested and charged under the Connecticut Comstock Act of 1879. They both violated this act by providing information and medical advice to married persons on means of preventing conception. They were both found guilty of aiding clients and were fined 100 dollars each.
According to the presumption of innocence,”a man is innocent until proven guilty”. Throughout the United States there are many different views by many different people and controversial court cases can display so. The controversial court case of Dr. Sam Sheppard, Sheppard was accused of killing his wife Marilyn Sheppard during the early morning of July 4, 1954. On December 24, 1954 Sheppard was guilty of murder in the second degree, but in November 16, 1966 Sheppard was found not guilty in his re-trial. In the controversial court case of Sam Sheppard, the guilty verdict initially incorrectly prosecuted Sheppard of murdering his wife Marilyn Sheppard.
At the end of this case, the court had this to
