Introduction One question that remains uncertain is whether the customary international law is applied by the federal common law of the United States. This paper, therefore, attempts to define the basic concept of international customary law and its application within the US legal system.
International customary law overview Defining what the international customary law is problematic, as the law itself is considered as a part of the international law rather than an individual codified law. The International Red Cross (2010) has assumed that “the international customary law is made of rules and general practices that fill the gap left by the treaties in both international and domestic dissension”.
Application in the U.S’ Federal common law system This article will go over some application of the International customary law within the Federal common law system. There have been several lawsuits solved under the usage of the customary law. Some common cases and related discussion will be reviewed as follows: The Paquette Habana Schaffer (2015) cited the Paquette Habana case in his book, that
…show more content…
Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) special agent was kidnapped, tortured, and murdered by a Mexican doctor, Alvarez Machain, in 1985. The DEA was unable to persuade the Mexican government to extradite Alvarez, so they paid Sosa, an anonymous Mexican national to kidnap and bring Alvarez back to the United States. However, when the case came to the district court, Alvarez was sentenced not-guilty due to a lack of evidence. After the liberation, Alvarez filed the civil suit in federal court against the DEA and Sosa, who kidnapped him, under the U.S Alien Tort Statute (ATS). The federal court, at first, ruled that the DEA was not liable for the suit, but Sosa was liable. On the appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal overturned the district court and sentenced that the DEA should not permit the arrest in another country that way and also upheld the judgment on
Then the defendants took her to a bridge and threw her off where she drowned. The day following the crime, the police came and arrested Simmons and his friends and charged them with burglary, kidnaping, stealing, and murder in the first degree.” (Roper v Simmons-No. 03–633. Supreme Court of Missouri. 1 Mar. 2005.
MILLERSBURG — A Wooster man on Wednesday was given a chance to avoid prison when he was sentenced to complete a treatment program for admittedly being in possession of methamphetamine. Shaun Hall, 38, 540 High St., previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to aggravated possession of meth. In exchange for his guilty plea, a related charge of aggravated trafficking in meth was dismissed. Hall had faced up to a year in prison for the charge, and Judge Robert Rinfret imposed a term of 11 months, but immediately suspended the period of incarceration in favor of five years of community control, which includes the condition he complete a treatment program at the Stark Regional Community Corrections Center.
This court considered the case en banc and had appellate jurisdiction. When the decision ended in a tie the previous district court decision was upheld and the U.S. Court of Appeals granted certiorari. The case was then heard by the Supreme
• Mapp’s was found guilty in the trial and sentenced from 1 to 7 years in jail. • The case was taken to the Supreme Court of Ohio were Mapp’s attorney claimed that the evidence
Petitioner, Triniti T. (“Student” or “Petitioner”) filed her initial request for due process hearing (“Beaumont I”) on February 24, 2014. In the request, Petitioner alleged that the District denied Student a free, appropriate public education (“FAPE”). A hearing was held on June 24-26, 2014 and a Decision following due process hearing (“Decision”) was issues on August 28, 2014. The Decision found that Petitioner had met her burden in proving that the District failed to provide Student with a FAPE in specific areas and the Petitioner was entitled various relief including, but not limited to specific prospective placement, services, assessments, training, devices/equipment for the remainder of the 2014-2015 school year; program development for the 2015-2016 school year, and reimbursement
: Petitioner, the State of Arizona, sought review of an order entered by the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona, which granted the defendant Pike’s motion to modify his sentence pursuant to Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32. During the time of the offense, a sentence of one year-life was officially put into place. Pike filed a petition for post-conviction relief to have his sentence altered because he believed that his sentence was cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The trial court granted Pike’s petition and gave him only 15 to 30 years and the state of Arizona filed a petition for review. On July 10, 1975, the defendant Pike was convicted of possession of dangerous drugs for sale which violated the A.R.S. §§ 32-1970(C), 32-1996(C), and 32-1901, and Pike was sentenced to serve a term of not less than 40 nor more than 50 years in the Arizona State Prison.
MILLERSBURG — Despite a plea for leniency expressed by the victim, a Sugarcreek man was unable to overcome a long history of criminal convictions and a bond violation when a Holmes County judge on Wednesday sentenced him to prison for making unwanted phone calls and threats to several members of a family over a period of months. David Lamar Schrock, 43, of 2578 State Route 39, previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to two counts of telephone harassment and one count of menacing by stalking. In exchange for his guilty plea, the state agreed to dismiss two additional counts of telephone harassment and three counts of menacing by stalking. The charges are made more serious because Schrock was convicted, in January 2016,
Although Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander customary laws are shown to be harsh, even brutal at times, Australian law has changed to integrate this cultural heritage. Although uncommon, customary law has been applied in legal rulings, as seen in cases involving Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people (Colin Goodsell v Galarrwuy Yunupingu). Traditional punishments such as payback have also been recognised by some Australian courts (The Queen v Wilson Jagamara Walker).[1] Furthermore, in some cases defence lawyers have specifically asked for their clients to be released on bail to face punishment under customary law.
He appealed his conviction and sentence to the Fourth District Court of Appeal and they affirmed that the Act does not violate any constitutionality challenged the defendant. Facts 1. The defendant committed to serve time for certain crimes and he was prison released in August 1996. 2.
This case was not successful because the search and seizure wnet againist the fourth
This decision was upheld by The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed. However, later the United Stated Supreme Court made a reversal and ruled that probable cause existed. This reversal lead to The US Supreme Court also making a reversal in their decision in the Spinelli case; it was determined that the” totality of the circumstances” should be considered when testing if probable cause,
From simply the intermittent utilization of drugs by Aaron Hernandez down to the minute he submitted the murder of Odin Lloyd. It is clear that the utilization of pot and PCP brought on the litigant to lose control of what was going ahead around him and respond without being completely mindful of his
Extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction can in many circumstances be a useful and legitimate response to transnational crime. Criminal activity is not always confined to territorial boarders, and so the law may seek to follow the crime to prevent an offender from enjoying impunity. A number of states have included in their criminal legislature provisions allowing for the investigation and prosecution of international crimes, even when such crime is committed outside their national territory and whether or not the perpetrators or the victims are nationals of the state concerned”. The importance of extraterritorial jurisdiction was also seen in the Advisory Opinion of 11 April 1949 – Reparations for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations. Personnel of the UN were targeted in Palestine which culminated in the assassination of
An issue in theoretical basis on what should prevail or which is supreme between International Law or Municipal Law (national law) is usually presented as a competition between monism and dualist. But in modern approach there is now the theory of coordination or is also called Harmonization theory that rejects the presumption of the other two theoretical concept, monism and dualism. The monist view asserts the international law’s supremacy over the municipal law even in matters within the internal or domestic jurisdiction of a state. While it is true that the international law defines the legal existence of states as well of the validity of its national legal order, the dualist asserts the international law is an existing system that is completely separated from municipal or national law. That dictates the
International laws are, by definition “A body of rules established by custom or treaty and recognized by nations as binding in their relations with one another” (www.oxforddictionaries.com). International law is a very significant topic because it affects everyone globally. In this research report, I would like to explore the advantages and disadvantages of international laws and consider if they should be enforced in all countries. The modern system we use today was developed in the 17th century in Europe and is still used worldwide (Stratton, 2009). After the Second World War, international unity became very popular (Neff).