U

.docx

School

Saint Leo University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

321

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BrigadierDove2550

CRM 321 Substantive Criminal Law Case Brief U.S. v. Sixty Acres in Etowah County, Evelyn Charlene Ellis Parties: The plaintiff in this case was United States of America, and the defendant was Evelyn Charlene Ellis. Facts: Undercover FBI informant bought marijuana from Mr. Ellis' home, where he lived with his wife. After the purchase, the FBI tried to arrest Mr. Ellis, but he fled. They spoke to Mrs. Ellis, the property owner, who denied knowing her husband sold drugs. Since the property was being used to grow marijuana, the government was trying to seize it. Under a civil forfeiture statute, the federal government can seek forfeiture of property used to commit or facilitate an illegal drug transaction unless the owner did not know or consent to it. Mrs. Ellis said she was afraid her husband would hurt her if she didn't sell drugs. She had proof he owned guns and had abused her before. He also beat his ex-wife to death, which she knew. Mrs. Ellis said she was pressured. Prior Proceedings: By entering a guilty plea, Hubert Ellis admitted to possessing marijuana and having the intent to distribute it, which is a controlled substance. In light of this, he was given a prison sentence, and the court ultimately made the decision to file a petition for the repossession of their property, which was registered in the name of Hubert's wife Elizabeth. As a result of the fact that she did not take part in Hubert's illegal activities and that it was discovered that she had been a victim of violence at the hands of Hubert, Evelyn regarded this as extremely unlawful. Furthermore, she had never given her consent to the cultivation of the controlled substance in their domicile. Issues Presented or Question of Law: Is it possible that a person's generalized fear of being persecuted would be sufficient evidence to demonstrate that they did not consent to engaging in illegal activities? Arguments or Objectives of the parties: Evelyn Charlene Ellis asserted that she is terrified of her husband because he caused her to experience worry and anxiety. As a result, she chose to remain silent by not informing the authorities about the criminal actions that her husband was engaging in. Holding/ Rule of law: For the purpose of preventing forfeiture, a generalized fear of persecution, which does not constitute pressure, shall not be regarded a lack of permission to engage in criminal acts. Core Values Displayed:

In my opinion, the core value that was violated in this situation was the principle of integrity. Due to the fact that Mr. Ellis was involved in illegal business and exhibited violent behavior toward his spouse. Rationale: If Mrs. Ellis's husband had threatened her with immediate harm from which she could not escape, the court acknowledged that Mrs. Ellis's circumstances would have been sufficient to justify the presence of duress. The evidence presented by the appellant demonstrated that she feared her husband because of his history of violent behavior. The court's sympathy was prompted by the fear claims; however, it was not sufficient to convince the court that she acted under duress and that she did not give consent to the incident that was taking place. Furthermore, the evidence did not provide any evidence that Mr. Ellis threatened her with immediate harm in the event that she reported the scenario. Conclusion: Since the appellee did not present sufficient evidence, the court overturned the decision made by the district court and granted the state's claim to the property.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help