Gideon V. Wainwright The case starts with the arrest of Clarence Earl Gideon who was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. Gideon was a runaway, having left home around eighth grade he became a drifter. He wandered around from place to place and spent time in and out of prison of prison for many non-violent crimes. He eventually found some part time work at a pool club, the same club room he was accused of breaking into and robbing.
"In controversial decision, the supreme court, by the closest possible margin of a 5 – 4 vote... a person has the right to burn the nations flag." (Page 18 Lines 1 – 3) And "It is, thus, no surprise that the first amendment is where it is in the bill of rights, for it is first in importance." (Page 19 Lines 33 – 34). People could not all agree to let this man go free.
They also explore Marshall’s Harvard Law Review in 1987. The author also examines and reflects Marshall’s opinions as a justice in the U.S. Supreme Court hearing Payne v. Tennessee. The author also reviews Marshalls court briefing in the case Brown v. Board of Education. Hemingway, Anna, et. al.
The government appealed the court of appeals decision to bring to the Supreme Court where it is now. I stand with full belief, and the majority opinion of the Supreme Court that Abel Fields’ conviction be overturned. His First Amendment rights had been violated. Even though he was
Prior to the case of Gideon v. Wainwright, defendant Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering in the state of Florida. This crime is a felony according to Florida state law. Unable to pay for defense counsel, Gideon requested that the court grant him one for free. The court denied Gideon his request of being granted defense counsel. The court stated, “Under the laws of the State of Florida, the only time the Court can appoint Counsel to represent a Defendant is when that person charged with a capital offense.” As a result of this denial of defense counsel, Gideon was forced to defend himself and did not succeed in doing an adequate job.
George Anthony The witness list includes Vasco Degama Thompson, an ex-convict who served time for kidnapping, ABC affiliate WFTV reported. The defense alleges that Thompson had phone conversations with George Anthony on July 14, just days before Caylee was reported missing,
The Christopher Vaughn case is a popular case in which ballistics and blood spatter aided in solving. Vaughn pleaded not guilty in court, and the defense stuck to the case that it was a murder-suicide case involving his wife. Paul Kish, a blood spatter expert assigned to the case, said that the evidence found at the crime scene did not correlate with Vaughn’s story. Vaughn’s blood was found in many different places; the center console, on his wife’s shorts, on the front and back of her seatbelt, and on the carpet between her shoes. Vaughn’s original statement did not mention the blood present on the seatbelt. When investigators at the crime scene unlatched and then re-latched her seatbelt, the wife’s chin was directly above the bloodstain. She was shot under the chin, therefore it was previously concluded that it must have been her blood present on the seatbelt. However, the Illinois State Police crime lab proved that it was in fact Christopher Vaughn’s blood on it. His wife’s blood was also found on the center console, but it was disturbed before it began to congeal. In addition, it appeared that some of her blood on the console was wiped towards the passenger seat from the driver’s seat. Kish concluded that someone had come into
The case was first heard in Pennsylvania but once that court ruled the law did not violate the first amendment he appealed and took it to the Supreme Court. In this hearing his main argument was that the law was in direct violation with the constitution which did not tolerate religions benefiting from state laws. The court went over the “three main evils” in order to prevent sponsorship, financial support, and involvement of the sovereign in religious activity. The first of those three tests is that the statute has to have a legislative purpose. Second, the principle must not advance or inhibit religion.
In September of 1961, a woman from District of Columbia had an intruder break into her apartment. While the invader of the home was there, they had taken her wallet, and also raped the woman. During the investigation of the crime, the police had found some latent fingerprints in the apartment. The police then established and processed the prints. The prints were then connected back to 16 year old Morris A. Kent. The prints the connected back to when Kent was first entering the system back in 1959 for his earlier crimes. Kent at this time had already been on probation due to crimes committed two years prior to this case. Morris Kent at the age of 14, had first come into contact with breaking the law when he was placed on probation for breaking
In 1972, one of the most iconic court cases about capital punishment was decided on: Furman v. Georgia. It considered both the constitutionality of the death penalty and its adverse effects on minority groups. The controversy of this decision was backed up by more than 200 pages of concurrences and dissents, culminating in a one page decision. In this decision, the Court nullified all existing capital punishment laws and pardoned everybody on death row. To reinstate the death penalty, states had to satisfy the Eighth Amendment by removing all “discriminatory” and “arbitrary” effects.
Clarence Thomas was born on June 23, 1948, in Pin Point, Georgia. His father left his family when he was young. That, and other issues as the years passed led his family into money problems. Clarence and his brother were sent to live with their grandfather and step-grandmother. His grandfather had a major influence on his religious beliefs. He transferred to St. John Vianney Minor Seminary while in high school and graduated from there in 1967. After the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. he heard some of his classmates at Immaculate Conception Seminary in Missouri making fun of his death. This led him to quit seminary and eventually attend Yale University Law School. After graduating from Yale, he worked for many years as a lawyer for the agricultural giant Monsanto. Then he moved to Washington D.C. where he worked some for President Ronald Reagan. In 1991 Thomas replaced the previous Supreme Court Justice and became the second African American justice to serve on the Supreme Court. Clarence Thomas was a part of many important Supreme Court Cases. A few of them include Morse v. Frederick, United States v. Morrison, and Grutter v. Bollinger.
John Marshall had a significant impact on strengthening the national government during his term as Chief Justice from 1800-1830. Marshall achieved this goal by strengthening the power of the Supreme Court in three main court cases. In Marbury v. Madison Marshall established the practice of judicial review, then in McCulloch v. Maryland he weakened the central government and Gibbons v. Ogden provided the federal government with the ability to regulate interstate commerce.
John Marshall’s Supreme Court hearings had a positive effect on the United States. From court cases like McCulloch v. Maryland, declared that the federal courts could decide if state laws were unconstitutional. The McCulloch v. Maryland trial went to the supreme court because Maryland had put a tax in place that too 2% of all assets of the bank or a flat rate of $30,000. John Marshall saw this tax as unconstitutional for the simple fact that people were being denied their property under the state legislature. From the Gibbons v. Ogden case, congress’s power over interstate commerce was strengthened. Marshall, being a strong federalist, ruled that state given monopolies were unconstitutional and believed that competition was healthy for business.
Throughout the course of America's History, there have been decisions in law that have defined the America as a country, that have reinvented laws for better or for worse, and have affected the lives of millions. Some of these impactful decisions fell under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court like Marbury v. Madison, Dred Scott v. Sandford, and Plessy v. Ferguson. Of course without the judgment of the Supreme Court Justices, none of the decisions could have been made. Earl Warren was a Supreme Court Justice who served from 1953 to 1969. During this period Earl Warren was truly able to leave a lasting impression on America’s history by helping decide court cases that were extremely important to the lives of millions in America then and now.