Patrice Seibert Case Study

However, Plaintiff failed to explain what instructions were or were not given. Defendant’s complaint lacked important substance to support the vicarious liability allegation; subsequently it is likely that our 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim will be granted. In conclusion, my legal team and I believe that it is likely that the whole complaint can be dismissed.

Also, if the state does not establish the necessity, the action will fail because the procedure is not narrowly tailored. Sterilization places a major burden on someone’s right to have children since the procedure is most likely irreversible. People who want to challenge these involuntary sterilization laws could win but due to procedure obstacles and practical considerations, plaintiffs have a difficult time getting it to

He then ran and kicked down the door and rescued a 3 year old girl, and then called the police. The girl’s mother was found inside. She seemed to have been raped and beaten to death (Gzedit). This shows how Richardson became a suspect, since he was at the scene at when the police arrived. Next, Richardson suspects that Fred hid the evidence.

Pou defends her actions by stating she was only making the patients comfortable, in a sense that if they allowed the patients to live through the next day it would be as if the patients were living in hell. In July 2006 the doctor and the nurses in connection with the death of the patients were arrested but the charges were later dropped.

While those in favor of her being found guilty seek imprisonment, others, like the opposing side, seek to have her let off due to the situation not being entirely her fault. Summary In the article “Flowers: Woman who goaded boyfriend to commit suicide must pay for dark act,” Christine Flowers argues in favor of Michelle Carter being held accountable for the death of her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III.

Boyette was convicted of attempted murder, robbery, and arson. The victim, a woman, was tied up and beaten, robbed, and then set on fire. Boyette was her neighbor. She knew him. From the beginning, she claimed that he was involved but she could not make an identification until later on due to injuries to her eyes.

The court date was set, and Diane had to appear as the victim of the crime. She was represented by the District Attorney in Wilkes County and the defendants attorney cross examined her when it was his turn. In his questioning of her about the events of the day she was attacked, he ask questions about what she was wearing and implied that she had in some way provoked Mr. Miller to flirt with her, leaving him angry and full of rage. Mr. Miller was released on an insanity plea and placed on probation.

The United States Supreme Court addressed part of this issue with their decision of Missouri v. Frye. In this case, the respondent’s attorney failed to inform him about two potential plea deals; a factor which the Court decided was a violation of Frye’s Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel (Missouri v. Frye, 2012). By making this decision, the Supreme Court is giving the defendants a significant amount of leverage. The Court’s decision opens the floodgates to an unprecedented amount of power on the part of the defense.

This reminds me of the Lifers as teenagers article. The Lifers as Teenagers Article tells of how Ashley Jones killed her grandfather and aunt with her boyfriend. I think this was cruel and unusual. I think if she would get out she would finish the job by killing her grandmother.

Case Study: Witness Transport Allison was a client whose ex-husband had tied her up, tried to cut off her fingers, cut her arms, bound her legs, doused her with gasoline and made an unsuccessful attempt to light her on fire before a SWAT team moved in and captured him. Our client had to go to court and testify about these crimes. The New Black Panthers turned out in support of the defendant, protesting on loudspeakers, doing anything they could to intimidate the witness. I decided against trying to force our way through the angry crowd. We set up a team of four.

The case Florida, Petitioner v. Joelis Jardines questions whether a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained drug-detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause (American Bar Association). The canine is being used as the use of surveillance in the investigation. The case begins with an unverified tip that marijuana was being grown in the home of Joelis Jardines on November 3, 2006 (American Bar Association). On December 5, 2006, around 7:00 a.m., the Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration sent a joint surveillance team to his home. Apart of the team is Detective Pedraja, whom watched the house for fifteen minutes.

The United States of America between the time period of 1800-1835 were creating the first modern democracy. They had a separation of powers by creating a Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary Branch. The Legislative branch being the the Senate and House of Representatives, the Executive branch being the President and his advisors, and the Judiciary branch being the Supreme court. The Supreme Court informed and validated all the laws. In the end, the Supreme Court in many of their cases like Gibbons v. Ogden, McCulloch v. Maryland, Marbury v. Madison, and Cohens v Virginia made decisions that sought to assert federal power over state laws and the primacy of the judiciary in determining the meaning of the constitution.

We’ll start with the use of sales representatives and how this relates to potential tax liability. P.L. 86-272 allows the use of sales representatives relating to interstate commerce without generating any net income tax related to tangible personal property within certain restrictions. For the sale to be protected under P.L. 86-272, the work of the sales representatives must be limited to solicitation- a mere “implicit invitation to an order” or “activities that are entirely ancillary to request for an order”. In Wisconsin Department of Revenue V. William Wrigley Jr. Co., the United States Supreme Court emphasized the nature of activities that would be considered ancillary under P.L. 86-272, “Solicitation of orders covers only the actual requests for purchases, or, at most, the actions absolutely essential to making those requests”. The operations of your sales force seem to be following this model where 1) they do not have the authority to accept any orders, and 2) they send the orders back to Ely, MN for them to be accepted and shipped.

The purpose of the dissent serves in furthering justice is to inform opinions to justify whether each case is constitutional or unconstitutional. For example, in the court case of Mapp v. Ohio, the dissenting opinion of the case is when the Supreme Court justice believes that pictures will be used against Mapp; however, the law enforcement did not refer back to the Constitution. There are cases today where police enforcement violates private affairs and searched without consent. Another important mark in history of important dissents is the court decision between Roe vs. Wade because of the overwhelming controversial issue that remains unsettled about abortion. Roe used the idea of the Fourth Amendment to justify the right to choose to terminate an unwanted or a medically dangerous pregnancy.

The Supreme Court recently began hearing oral arguments in a case, where two men were convicted of bribery by a jury. However, that conviction was overturned by an appeal because the jury had been improperly instructed as to what constitutes a guilty verdict. The attorney for the defense, Lisa Blatt said, “The government should bear the consequences when overlapping charges produce split verdicts of acquittals and invalid convictions.” This quote identifies with one of the fundamental principles of the American legal system, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. While Blatt continues to argue that the vacated conviction is worthless.