State V Marshall 426 Case Study

Name: Terry v. Ohio 392 US1 Supreme Court 1968 Facts: The incident occurred on October 31st 1963 at approximately 2:30pm in the afternoon. The police officer who was dressed in plain clothes was attracted by Terry and Chilton who were casing a store. With 30 years of prior experience in the area. The officer knew casing when he saw it. He had been assigned to that area specifically in search for shoplifters and pick pockets.

In Commonwealth v. Newman, 429 PA. 441 (1968), on November 16, 1964, at about 11:30 a.m. four detectives went to appellant 's home with a body warrant for appellant and a search warrant for the premises. The complaint for the search warrant recited that the affiant, Detective John McCrory, deposed that there was probable cause to believe that certain books, papers, and other items used for the purpose of a lottery were in the possession of Henderson Newman at or near 721 West Mary Street. They forcefully entered the appellant 's home without announcement or purpose. The court held that, the forcible entry without announcement of purpose violates the Fourth Amendment. The fruits of an illegal search are inadmissible under Mapp v. Ohio,

The first case that caused the Supreme Court to allow officers to authorize a search and seizure, was the Terry vs. Ohio case in 1968. The case ruled whether or not it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protection from an unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court then determined that the practice of stopping and frisking a suspect in public does not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as the officer has a “reasonable suspicion”. Suspicions such as a person that may seem like they’re planning a crime, have committed a crime, or that may be armed and appear as dangerous. The reason why this policy escalated was due to an incident that happened On October 31, 1963 in Cleveland, Ohio.

My case is about the murder of a man ,Travis Parker, who was found in his car dead with four gun shot wounds. He had one bullet wound on the right side of his head and three bullet wounds on his chest . Travis was covered in blood and it was at least four bullets on the ground inside of the car. When Travis body was found , he was sitting up straight as if someone put him that way to make it seem like he killed himself. No blood was found splasterrd in the car besides the blood that we on his body which means the suspected didn’t kill him in the car and set it up to make it seem like he killed himself and luckily for this case we have witness to what was going with Travis leading up to his

Jessica Hillis Instructor Fisk CRM-123 13 Nov 2016 Case Brief 3 Commonwealth v. Berggren 496 N.E.2d 660 (1986) Procedural History: The defendant is on trial for the crime of homicide caused by the careless operation of a motor vehicle such to endanger public safety. Facts: The defendant was pursued by an on-duty police officer in a marked police car. The defendant chose not to stop for “fear of his license” and caused the officer to pursue him for approximately six miles.

Law enforcement and citizens each have their own explanation and definition what excessive force is and how it should be handled. There are different ways how law enforcement uses their excessive force which could have been different in the past from now. There needs to be various amount of changes in the police department to reduce the incident of excessive force. Excessive force is a current issue that needs to be reduced to justify every case correctly and avoid this hot controversy. All individuals in society have their own definitions and point of views on what excessive force is and how it should be handled.

United States v. Morrison was a supreme court case about violence against women. In 1944 while enrolled at Virginia polytechnic institute, Christy Brzonkala alleged that Antonio Morrison and James Crawford sexually assaulted her. Both male students were varsity football players. In 1995 Christy filed a complaint against Morrison and Crawford under Virginia Tech 's Sexual Assault Policy. After a hearing, Morrison was found guilty and Crawford was not.

To: Junior Associate From: Supervising Attorney Re: DC v. Blake Mr. Jonathan Blake, a new client of the firm, recently requested our legal services in a criminal matter. Mr. Blake was recently arrested for possession of a controlled substance by the Metropolitan Police Department. According to Mr. Blake, the facts are as follows: Jessie Smith and his wife are the co-owners of a residence at 3630 16th St. NW, Washington DC, 20015.

On October 3, 1974, at around 10:45 pm, Elton Hymon and Leslie Wright of the Memphis Police Department were responding to a “prowler on the inside” call. They made the scene and observed a woman in the house next to the intended home of the call. She was standing on her front porch pointing at the house. She advised that she had heard glass breaking and someone was breaking into the house next door. As Wright showed both officers on the scene on his radio to dispatch, Hymon went to the rear of the house.

Homicide is not imperative when arresting someone. "In the vast majority of such encounters, I was able to peacefully resolve the situation without using force"(Dutta). This is the proper way to handle being challenged situations instead of killing the criminal. Since there are better alternatives to handling criminals who resist, or fight back there is no reason why police officers should have to shoot criminals. In Alton Sterling 's case, he was shot several times while being on the ground.

The police actions were unjustifiable and unwarranted in this situation. In the court care of Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court ruled that, “deadly force may not be used unless there is a reasonable cause to believe there is a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others exists” (Hendrix, 2013, page 194). The use of physical force should not be used in the manner of vindictiveness, retaliation, or punishment purposes. This display of action is unprofessional and is against the code of conduct. The suspect’s actions of getting out of her vehicle warranted the use of force, because she approached the officer in a threating manner.

The Ninth Amendment states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be constructed or deny or disparage others retained by the people” (Bill of Rights). This amendment was made to protect people’s rights. Including things like marriage, abortion, slavery, and police conduct. However, this modification has been compromised several times in the past and the present.

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.