Case Study: Pate V. Millersburg

him terribly and I know that he has been asking about me.’ Referring to the declarations

During the months of September to the end of November 2008 Mr Hughes resurfaces with six serious criminal offences, mostly involving break enter and steal of which was from a business, a warehouse, a workshop and two homes. Two of these offences involved criminal acts that incurred separate charges, which were

Durham Regional Police arrested the victim, charging him with theft under $5,000, two counts of assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon, and possession of marijuana, but all charges were withdrawn after a pretrial hearing on May 5.

Kyle Miller, 24, of 11976 Dover Road, Apple Creek, pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to a reduced charge of domestic violence and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. In exchange for his guilty plea, the state agreed to dismiss a related charge of felonious assault and reduced the domestic violence charge, enhanced because she was pregnant at the time, from a fifth-degree felony to a first-degree misdemeanor.

On December 9, 1993, Jimmie Cates pled guilty to Simple Burlgary and was sentenced to three (3) years hard labor by Judge Robert Fleming. The court suspended the sentence and placed Jimmie Cates on three (3) years supervised probation. The court placed special conditions of paying court cost, paying a fine of $500.00, reimbursing the Indigent Defender Board $250.00 for legal services, and pay a $20.00 per month probation fee. There are no records at the office of Probation

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has charged Nathan Moss (Mr. Moss) with 1 count of violating a no contact order that Claire Cohen (Ms. Cohen) put out against him. Nathan Moss and Claire Cohen are both seniors at Plymouth South High School and dated for about 10 months prior to Ms. Cohen placing a protective order against Mr. Moss.

This case involves a robbery in which the respondent, Pat Purple, attempted to forcibly steal a cell phone from a young woman. The respondent is being charged with the following: robbery, grand larceny, attempted assault, and possession of stolen property We are here to ask you, Your Honor, to make sure that Pat Purple is convicted and found guilty.

The sixth and fourteenth amendment both protect rights having to do with due process and right to counsel.

Yes, each state should apply the Supreme Court ruling of Miller v. Alabama retroactively. There were two cases reviewed by the Supreme Court that determined their ruling. Evan Miller and his friend Colby Smith robbed, assaulted, and murdered Cole Cannon on July 15, 2003. Miller and Smith, age fourteen had been drinking and doing drugs the night the incident occurred. Miller and Cannon got into a fight over Miller stealing money from Cannon that lead to Miller repeatedly striking him with a baseball bat. After placing a sheet on Cannon and before striking him in the head for the last time, Miller states “I am God, I’ve come to take your life” (“Supreme Court”, 2011). To destroy the evidence, Miller and Smith set Cannon’s trailer on fire and left him to die.

McCulloch vs. Maryland (1819), the constitutional questions asked were: Did congress have the right to establish a bank? Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally with the congressional powers? In 1816, congress chartered The Second National Bank of the United States. In 1818, Maryland passed legislation to tax the bank and cashier of the Baltimore branch bank James MucCulloch refused to pay the tax. This court case took place in the Marshall court, under federalist, Chief Justice John Marshall who ruled this case in favor of MucCulloch. The court’s decision was unanimous in favor of MucCulloch and, the courts held that Congress had the power to establish a bank but Maryland could not tax the bank and that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

In 2014, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed a guidance policy called the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), which would grant temporary deportation protection to about 4.3 million undocumented immigrants. But in that year, twenty-six states challenged the DAPA guidance, therefore the Supreme Court will decide whether the states have standing to challenge DAPA if will increase the costs of state-subsidized benefits, for example drivers license , and if DAPA is lawful and constitutional under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution. This case is called United States v. Texas. The United States states that Texas lacks Article III standing to challenge

According to the Seven Circuit court’s ruling and the Supreme Court holding is that the petitioner had previously been involved in other three related felony issues. These felonies were consequently recorded towards the end of the month of November in 1995 and they include two robbery convictions and an attempt to flee law enforcement

This brings us to the 1973 United States case of Gagnon v. Scarpelli. Gerald Scarpelli was charged with armed robbery in Wisconsin (“Gagnon v. Scarpelli”, n.d.). Scarpelli pleads guilty to his crime

Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978) The Court held that a defendant must prove there is a legitimate expectation of privacy for a search to be challenged.

Richard’s first arrest, the beginning to his extensive criminal history, occurred at age 13 for trespassing and was followed by numerous other arrests over the better half of a decade. When he was 21 years old, Richard was found guilty of forging a fellow co-worker’s