South Carolina Vs Frank Pittman Case Study

Case: South Carolina v. Christopher Frank Pittman (Findlaw, 2008)

Facts: That Pittman, shot and morality wounded both his grandparents, Joe Frank and Joy Pittman, with a .410 shotgun. Appellant was 12 years old at time of alleged incident, he was abandoned by his mother, and his relationship with his father was abusive. Prior to moving in with grandparents, appellant had been committed to an inpatient facility, where he was on the antidepressant Paxil, soon he was released and permitted to live with grandparents (Findlaw, 2008). .

His behavior began to improve, while still on the Paxil, appellant grandmother ensured he continued with his treatment for depression, by taking him to see local doctor to refill his prescription for Paxil.

Our appellate courts will be the ones making the policy, while our trail courts will enforce the policy, it appear that many of the lower courts have more discretion when enforcing the appellate court decisions. Why is this possible many are nonlawyers who do not possess the skills needed to read many of complex judicial decisions, and due in part the decisions of the higher courts as well. Many of the policy are available and the judges are anticipated to read them. When the lower court infers the higher courts decision is based upon different factors, such as the judges on personal policy, their background, alternatively the lower court judge will embrace the higher courts decision while others may not. So if a judge doesn’t agree with the higher courts policy he or she may apply it cautiously or under pressure. When our lower courts get a case with no standard, they will sometime look elsewhere for the direction in determining a case before them (United States Department of State Office of International Information Programs,