Essay about Brief of Begay V. United States 553 U.S. 137, 128 S.Ct. 1581

Citation: New Jersey v. T. L. O. 469 U.S. 325 105 S. Ct. 733; 83 L. Ed. 2d 720; 1985 U. S. LEXIS 41; 53 U.S.L.W. 4083.

I believe you were terribly wronged by being held in custody pretrial in the Santa Fe County Detention Center under demeaning, unnecessarily punitive conditions. I am truly sorry that I was led by our executive branch of government to order your detention last December. Dr. Lee, I tell you with great sadness that I feel I was led astray last December by the executive branch of our government through its Department of Justice, by its Federal Bureau of investigation, and by its United States of attorney for the district of New Mexico. (Lee & Zia, 2003, p.

Police use their judgment and discretion when determining if someone is under the influence while driving. There are not many choices for discretion when an officer is faced with a DUI situation. When an individual has made the choice to drive under the influence, an officer knows that if this behavior is allowed than someone innocent can get hurt. There is a choice of discretion, an officer can ignore the fact that an individual may or may not be under the influence while driving, but the decision to do so would be an abuse of authority. Not only in this situation is it an abuse of authority but also an abuse of being a protector of society.

Ratified in 1787(IIP), the American constitution became the supreme law of the land under article VI of the document: and when the Supreme Court has appropriate jurisdiction, they have the definite power to determine what is says. However, under special circumstances this can be refuted due to article III of the constitution states that congress has the power to make exceptions to the court 's appellate jurisdiction(Heritage). Ergo, while the Supreme Court has the power to say what the constitution is, Congress has the power to grant or remove jurisdiction from any appellate case that is not considered original jurisdiction.

Abstract This writing is on the many arguments that arise about the blood alcohol concentration limits around the country. Should the limits be lowered, keep them the same, and is there too much of a risk involved by lowering (BAC) limits? Costello (2014), and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), report other areas of concern such as, injury prevention and safety countermeasures. That scenario will be the focus of the (BAC) limits presently being lowered throughout many states across the U.S. There will be a review of the public’s viewpoint concerning the reduction in these limits. A look into the legal system’s involvement with (BAC) limit changes. There are numerous attorney’s around the world fighting for driving under the influence (DUI) and driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenses to be dropped. Also, the many counter-arguments raised by attorneys, the public and National Transportation Safety Board statistical reports on injury prevention outcomes and alcohol related incidences being reduced post-law.

Norris case which was brought up in the courtroom; Mr. Hard was not as drunk. (Ashlock v. Norris, 475 N.E.2d 1167, 1170 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985). The bartender, Mr. John Daniels did not have any definite awareness of Mr. Hard’s intoxication. Mr. Daniels is not able to recall any unusual behavior that was displayed by Mr. Hard. He does not have any reclamation of observing Mr. Edward Hard tripping over the pool stick because he had stepped away from the room. He did witness an argument start at the entrance doorway between Mr. Bruno White and Mr. Edward Hard in which Mr. Hard provoked. There were no additional drinks served after the altercation took place, the final alcoholic beverage had been ordered and served prior to the incident and therefore is not said to be actual knowledge. The last drink is the cutoff point for the statue and where the definite ruling intervenes. The process is in order to try and obtain an abstract opinion from Mr. John Daniels stating that he had no familiarity of Mr. Hard being drunk. When Mr. Edward Hard left the O’Malley’s Tavern he followed Mr. Bruno White in a careless manner, damaging numerous vehicles and consequently hitting Mr. White’s automobile and killing him. The direct aim of Mr. Hard is being safeguarded with the implication of a motor vehicle accident while being intoxicated. The understanding and cause of the intoxication is not what is relevant, however the altercation that occurred at

(Note: The terms “DWI” and “DUI” are often used roughly interchangeably, but “DWI” – driving while intoxicated – is the term recognized by Missouri courts and will be used in this article.)

The offender was a 47 year old man who has been addicted to meth since the 90s and has been struggling with the problem ever since. The offender did not say much when he was sitting next to his attorney. The only time that he ever spoke was when the judge asked him if he had anything to say about the situation, which of course he did. The offender had said that he realizes what he’s done was wrong (Superior Courts).

In justice system, the goal is to have laws and amendments that is fair to all people no matter

While on my detail, i observed a white male, later identified via florida driver`s license, as omar gomez, herein after referred to as the arrestee, screaming and yelling at white female, later identified via d.a.v.i.d as fernanda altamrino, herein after referred to as the victim in front of the above location.

Have you ever wondered what a DUI is? Or what it stands for? Well, a DUI is short for Driving Under the Influence. A misdemeanor is driving under the influence charges means that the charge involved no injury or property damage and the penalty is up to 6 months in jail. If someone got injured then the penalty could go up to as much as three years in a state prison. Also one prior felony DUI lasts up to 10 years. (duifighters.com). Most people who are arrested for DUI are charged with CVC. It’s illegal to operate a car with any alcohol or drug. Also there is no minimum blood alcohol level which means you can be arrested and charged with a DUI with a blood alcohol level of

One thing which is essential to realize is that even a DUI driver has his/her rights, which can be protected. One just needs to have the right lawyers to help them in this process.

In the United States the court-system operates as a dual-court system. The responsibilities of the State and Federal Courts share the responsibility of determining law based on specific jurisdictions. The principle of federalism was born out of the necessity to balance the powers of the states by creating a federal government whose authority constituted the supreme law of the land. Proponents of court reform have been looking for court unification to streamline the judiciary system to combine overlapping jurisdictions and centralize the administration. Many states have claimed to have been unified, but these are at the trial court level. Empirical data has not been able to establish the effectiveness and efficiency of court unification at the state trial court level and, therefore, I do not see the likelihood of a monolithic court system occurring between state and federal court systems. If I were a judge, my sentencing goals and philosophies would be reflective of today’s contemporary goals and would be guided by three sentencing fundamentals of proportionality, equity, and social debt. As a result, how I feel about a defendant or the crime is irrelevant. Based on the facts, actions and intentions of the defendant punishment will be issued based on the appropriate sentencing guidelines in order to prevent sentencing disparities. This includes cases of capital murder that are extremely difficult to judge.

Alcohol consumption is considered to be a part of culture in many countries and the United States is no exception to this ideological thinking. However, drinking responsibly and understanding the impairments alcohol has on the body is a key component to being safe and within the regulations and laws established by the states. With this being said, many people still find themselves behind the wheel of a vehicle after consuming too much alcohol and are quickly found to be in violation of the laws set forth. Alcohol is a key factor in many traffic accidents and the lethality of these accidents increase when alcohol is involved, leading to 41% of all traffic fatalities being caused by a DUI offender in 2002 (Hingson & Winter 63). Driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol can be defined as being over an established limit of Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) prescribed by that state. While most states have set their basic BAC level to 0.08%, the sanctions, treatment and monitoring of offenders is widely varied across the states (Voas, et al 1221). The effects on DUI offenders, although varied, follow a similar guideline that includes license suspensions, treatment, offender monitoring, fines, and sometimes incarceration.

On a beautiful Monday morning in February, I had an amazing adventure walking down to the Supreme Court of Ohio. It was a typical day in columbus; a sunny day with a nice breeze blowing slowly against my face as I walked twenty minutes with a bunch of my friends down the busy roads of Ccolumbus. Having absurd friends, they would fatuously point out to things they’d find absurd and make fun of it; like the guy that was walking down to the Columbus Commons without a jacket or a windbreaker. As we walked, I could spot the building from a distance first noticing the big carvings that read, “The Supreme Court Of Ohio”.