Calvin White V. Case Brief

The Dred Scott Decision was a famous Supreme Court case, deciding over the decision of slavery was legal in the newly discovered territory. It debated over the decision of whether it was legal for slaveholders to take their property into the newly formed territory or whether their property should be freed in this process. The ruling concluded in 1857 and affirmed that slaveholders should have the right to take their slaves to the west . The decision took three attempts to finally reach a conclusion about whether an African American living in recently developed land should be considered free or not. Below I will discuss the life of Dred Scott, the Scott v. Emerson Case, the Scott v. Sandford Case, the eradicating of slavery, and the path to black citizenship in the proceeding decades.

The Cherokees provided the best example of Native Americans who understood their rights most clearly as they demonstrated in their plight objecting the Cherokee removal and as they exhibited in the construction of a constitution strikingly similar to the United States constitution as well as those of the states, carefully outlining their rights in an organized coherent manner. Consistent with the federal and state constitutions, the Cherokee constitution reflected a profound belief in republicanism, a representative form of government in which those eligible to vote elected individuals to make laws to protect their life, liberty, and property.

The Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States of America. With this title they have the final say about the decisions for the country. However the Supreme Court can make mistakes and have so before. The case considered the worst Supreme Court decision among many scholars is the Dred Scott V. Sanford case from the pre-civil war era. In which time slavery was a very hot topic between the states. In this case it was determined that a slave was not only not a citizen of the United States but also property (our documents). This court ruling made useless of the Missouri compromise of 1850 which made states above the 36°30’ line Free states and all below the line slaves states (History). This decision was eventually overturned by the Civil War amendments the 13th and 14th which stated that slavery is illegal in all states not only ones in rebellion and that all people born in the united states are citizens including people of color (our documents).

Dred Scott, an enslaved African American from Virginia, worked most of his life on a cotton plantation in Alabama owned by Army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson. Scott went along with his owners to Illinois and later out to the Wisconsin Territory, where the act of slavery was illegal. Later on, the family moved back to Missouri where the doctor eventually died. After this experience, Dred Scott, with the help of antislavery lawyers and his old owners, filed for his freedom. Scott felt that he was a free man due to him once living in a free area for four years. Years passed until one fateful day when Scott’s case reached the Supreme Court.

Rule of Law: The Due Process Clause requires the government to demonstrate a criminal respondent's blame past a reasonable doubt, and trial courts must abstain from characterizing sensible uncertainty in order to lead the jury to convict on a lesser appearing than due procedure requires. In these cases, the court inferred that, 'taken in general, the guidelines effectively passed on the idea of reasonable doubt to the jury.

You will locate background information on OLMSTEAD V. L. C. (98-536) 527 U.S. 581 (1999), otherwise known as “The Olmstead Decision.”The Internet resources you find in this course will lead you to enough information to adequately answer these questions. You may also do independent research to locate informational websites about this case.

I visited Monroe County Court on March 30th, 2016. The court case was called, “Williams vs United States”, and Williams was being sued for possession of an unregistered handgun on September 18th, 2015. The court procedure started at about 2:45 P.M. when Judge Randall entered the courtroom. Upon entering the courtroom everyone present arose. After rising Judge Randall asked everyone in the courtroom to sit down, and the judge briefly overviewed the nature of the case.

Here I am, the defendant in court. The plaintiff, Mr. Johnson filed a lawsuit me of all sorts of misdemeanors against him. He is, rightly, accusing me of attempting to burgle his house, catching me with trying to steal his alarm clock from his counter. He let me go the first time, due to the fact that I was stealing the stupid clock because it would go off in the middle of the night for hours. However, he caught me committing larceny again after he found me trying to take his stereo. He was still forgiving but didn’t believe me when I told him it was because he played his music far too loud. But there are now torts ahead, I tried to commit robbery, breaking into his house in the middle of the night, and tying him to the nightstand, threatening

Facts: The victim was trying to steal some windshield wipers off the Defendant’s junked car. Words was exchanged back for and then the defendant went back into the house to get a lethal weapon. The Defendant threatened the victim multiple times to get away from his car. The Defendant then shot the victim because he was carrying a wrench when he steps out of his car.

While driving Curtis Campbell the defendant, chose to pass six vans on a two-lane highway. Another driver was Todd Ospital, who was approaching from the other side. Moreover, to avoid a head on collision with the defendant, Ospital swerved over into the shoulder of the highway lost control of his vehicle and crashed in to driver Robert Slusher. In result Ospital was killed, and Slusher was permanently disabled, meanwhile the Campbell’s escape without a scratch. Being charged for wrongful death the defendant believed he was not at fault, however evidence differed his claim. The Campbell’s insurance company decided to deny the offer made by Slusher & Ospital estate for a settlement of “50,000 ($25,000 per claimant)”. (Oyez) Which lead the defendant to be found completely at fault, and judgment went back up to up to $185,849.( Cornell Law). Three years later the defendant, Slusher, and made an agreement that they would not speak against Mr. Campbell; and in exchange the defendant would sue the insurance

A year later, former Supreme Court Justice Charles E. Whittaker had just retired after only 2 years in. Byron White was one of the 3 suggested replacement judges. The other two were Harvard law professor Paul Freund, and federal appeals judge William Hastie. White’s name was suggest by his replacement Nicholas Katzenbach, to Robert Kennedy (Cushman). After almost 2 weeks, White was chosen by a voice vote in the Senate. White was elected with no prior judicial

There have been a lot of shooting by police officers in the past year. Here are some of the shootings. There was a police shooting in Ferguson, Missouri on August. 9, 2014. A police officer shot and killed Michael Brown. What led to Brown's death he was caught on a surveillance stealing some cigarillos. Brown, and Johnson walking along west Florissant Avenue when officer Darren Wilson arrived on the scene. Officer Wilson told the two men to move to the sidewalk. The officer said that Mr. Brown fit the description of the suspect that is related to the store theft that took place a few minutes earlier. Then the officer made a call to the dispatcher about the two men also the officer stopped Michael Brown and another a men at a traffic stop,

we received this packet of information from Nick Williams who had it dropped off at the Local Union by somebody who identified himself as Richard Audette. I had no idea what this was about but I called Mr. Audette and I asked him and he said I ought to know what it was about and ultimately seems to be a very troubled individual who made some threating remarks. He was going to call the Attorney General and Judge Nugent but I ultimately said good bye and did some research and found his case out there about a problem that he has had with a Charitable Trust that went to the Supreme Court.

I believe that it´s the same offender in the Parkinson case and the Johnson case, which is making the offender a serial killer because he has killed 3 people and it has been over a period over 30 days. By looking at different serial killer typologies my firm belief is that this offender will fall into the lust serial killer typology. I concluded this by firstly looking if the crimes were act-focused kills or process kills, I concluded it was process kills because the offender had taken the time to abduct both Parkinson and Johnson and didn 't just kill them right away like an act-focused killer would do. With the offender being a process killer he could only be organized as well because process killers cannot be disorganized. The offender would either be a lust killer, power-control killer or a thrill killer. I concluded that the offender in this case would not be a thrill serial killer, since this kind of murderer gets off my seeing his victims suffering, which is the most important factor for this type of offender. In the Parkinson and Johnson murders there were no signs of torture on the victims bodies and therefore I do not believe that this offender would be a thrill serial killer.

Calvin should not win the lawsuit this was a worst an honest mistake. From the moment Cavin entered the store Sara could tell he was out of place. With the way he dressed it was obvious that he couldn’t afford the clothes in the department store. Sara continued to watch him until Calvin took an expensive pair of jeans into the dressing room. Being the only sales person around, she was concerned that if she did not detain him until a security guard was present that if Calvin put on the jeans and left the store then she would not be able to stop him. The detention was completely justified under the circumstances to avoid a potential catastrophe where Sara could have been injured. Also, just because Calvin had money on him, does not mean he wasn’t