Case Study: Rivera V. US

On November 25, 1999, The Coast Guard rescued 5 year old Elian Gonzalez from the Atlantic Ocean. Elian was found on an inner tube clinging to life with dehydration and hypothermia. His mother, Elisabeth Brotons, along with several others drowned on their trip from Cuba. The INS placed Plaintiff with his uncle, Lazaro Gonzalez, who lives in Miami, Florida. On November 27, 1999, Plaintiff's father, Juan Gonzalez, sent a letter to the Cuban government requesting that his son be in Cuba. The letter stated that the Plaintiff was taken out of Cuba without his father’s consent. On November 29, 1999, Lazaro Gonzalez signed and submitted an application for asylum to the INS on behalf of Elian. Shortly after, another application was submitted with Elian’s signature.

During the supreme court case U.S v. Lopez, the United States Federal Government’s argument was that carrying a firearm inside an educational environment would lead to a violent crime. A violent crime ultimately affects the population of a school. Due to this, the federal government believed that the commerce clause should be practiced in this case. The Supreme Court backed the previous decision offered by the Five Court of Appeals. In United States v. Lopez, the U.S Supreme Court stated that Congress actually has the ability to make laws under the Clause, but these powers were limited and could not affect the Lopez case.

The questions presented to the Supreme Court in Raich v. Gonzales (2005) are whether the Commerce Clause affords Congress the power to ban the growth, use, and sale of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act and whether it can enforce that act against ill people whose doctors have prescribed medical marijuana as a remedy. Writing for the majority in that case, Justice John Paul Stevens employed Justice Stephen Breyer’s strand of pragmatism to answer those questions. The premise of Breyer’s approach is that the Constitution enshrines values and principles, but it grants judges the flexibility to apply those principles to changing circumstances (Yale 11). Hence, pragmatist judges embrace constitutional

Factual History: In Los Angeles, California during the month of October and year of 2009, Abel Lopez was attacked and robbed by a man with a knife, he later identified as Walter Fernandez. During the confrontation between Lopez and Fernandez, Fernandez informed Lopez the territory in which Lopez was ruled by the “Drifters” After Lopez placed a call to 911, a few minutes after the attack, police and paramedics arrived on the scene. Two Los Angeles police officers, Detective Clark and Officer Cirrito, drove to a nearby alley that was often contained members of the Drifters gang. Here in the ally, a witnesses told them that the suspect was in an apartment in a house located off the

P alleges temporary loss of his dog and false arrest. P alleges he was holding his dog on a leash on the street when MOS grabbed and threw him to the ground causing P to let go of the leash. P alleges that the dog lunged towards defendant MOS and MOS shot at the dog. P alleges that he was cuffed and taken to the precinct and defendant MOS took his dog to an animal dog as a lost dog. P alleges that he had to pay $280 to retrieve his dog back. P alleges that MOS did not allow his tied his dog up. P alleges that the criminal charges were, later, dismissed. No other information is known about the case. It is unclear what role, if any, Defendant MOS Jeffrey Sisco, played in this

It should be noted Brown also told me a few weeks ago on two separate occasions

P alleges assault and false arrest. P claims he was a guest at a party when MOS arrived and recovered a firearm on the ground. P claims that he was not in possession of a firearm. P alleges that he was falsely arrested for criminal possession of weapon, sprayed with mace, and assaulted by MOS. Defendant MOS states that they were responding to a radio run for shots fired and a vehicle fleeing the scene. While canvassing the area, MOS observed a party in a yard which had very loud music playing and people were drinking in the street. Sgt. Arquer entered the party through the main entrance to shut down the party, and MOS Mayer entered through the side gate. As Sgt. Arquer was speaking to an individual, MOS Mayer observed P walking in his direction

Plaintiff claims false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution and assault. Per the Law Department abstract, officers, including Det. Hernandez were executing a search warrant. Officers entered the apartment and brought everyone inside the apartment into the living room including plaintiff and handcuffed. Everyone including plaintiff were searched. Officers recovered marijuana from separately apprehended Jeffrey McCaskill’s person. Plaintiff was transported to the precinct 48 pct. Plaintiff states officers removed her from the holding celling, assaulted by officers, and placed in shackles. Plaintiff allegedly bended Det. Moises Martinez left hand causing injury when he tried to place in shackles. Plaintiff was re-arrest for assault.

P alleges false arrest for criminal possession of a weapon. P alleges that she was visiting her boyfriend’s apartment when MOS forcibly entered the apartment and searched the apartment. P alleges that P informed MOS that she does not resided at the apartment however she was arrested. Defendant MOS Mayer stated that while on regular patrol he observed Khalid Edwards, whom MOS Mayer had previously arrested at the location, exiting the building. The landlord of the building that previously informed MOS Mayer that he was going to evict Mr. Edwards. MOS Mayer approached and questioned Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards informed MOS Mayer had he was not living in the building however he was staying there. MOS Mayer went to the apartment to verify Mr. Edwards’s

This case is consolidated with Victoria Goetz vs. NYC (2013-052590) Ps are brother and sister and allege false arrest. P David Diaz alleges that MOS entered his bedroom and knocked him to the ground then was cuffed and placed with his face down on the bed. P Quintesha Diaz alleges that she was getting ready for school when MOS entered. P Quintesha Diaz alleges that a female MOS patted her down in the bathroom then she was tightly handcuffed, causing cuts to her wrists and swelling. P Quintesha Diaz alleges that as a result of the incident she missed 2 two days of school and her AP English exam (which caused an opportunity to have the exam credit accepted by Hunter College). Defendant MOS Sisco states he was executing a search warrant and narcotics

P alleges false arrest. P was arrested for shooting CW Flaming St. Fleur (non-party). At Grand Jury, Mr. St. Fleur testified that he was shot and turned around saw P standing there. P was indicted by a grand jury. Mr. St. Fleur went to the precinct and recanted his identification of P to Det. Torres. Det. Torres informed Mr. St. Fleur to go to the DA’s office. On 11/3/2008, Mr. St. Fleur spoke with ADA Thomas McManus and recant his identification of P. Mr. St. Fleur identified another person as shooter and claimed to the person in the neighborhood. P was incarcerated when Mr. St. Fleur stated seeing the shooter of the street. Criminal charges were, later, dismissed. P was incarcerated for more than 10 months. Mr. St. Fleur stated in an affidavit

The people who were involved in this case are first the police who are the professionals in the criminal justice who are allowed to enforce the law. The implication being that the police, who go to ask for a search warrant were just acting on the premise of the probable cause in seeking to understand the respondent, who in this case is Leon. There is the judge who gives the search warrant, and this helps to show the role of the judiciary in criminal justice system, they are expected to interpret the law in courts. The defendant, in this case, is Leon, who has been accused of possession of illegal drugs and was charged in a court of law in the cases in which the state is a party, it is the prosecutor who undertakes in arguing the

P alleges false arrest. P alleges that MOS approached and searched him. P alleges after searching him, MOS approached his brother, Rashawn Belle (non-party) and arrested. P alleges that he went to inquiry about his brother’s arrest and MOS arrested him. MO Pizzarro, seated in unmarked vehicle, observed P taking money from people then meet up with his brother. Then, MOS Pizzarro radioed what transcribed to the MOS Nigro and approached P and his brother. As MOS Pizzarro was approaching them, P and his brother began to walk away. MOS Pizzarro observed P had his brother a plastic bag then the brother threw the bag into the bushes. MOS apprehended P’s brother while P had walked ahead. After P’s brother was arrest, P came back to the location and

Search warrant. Ps allege false arrest. There are 3 Ps in the case – Victor Ruiz, Maria Alcantar and Argelia Flores (minor). Ps allege they were home when MOS entered their home with guns drawn. Ps allege that they were handcuffed while MOS searched the apartment. P Victor Ruiz alleges the MOS took him to the bathroom and forced him to strip search. Ps allege that MOS used canines to search the apartment. MOS Thomas Decker states that they were executing a search warrant obtained after confident informant buys at the location. MOS Decker swore the affidavit to get the search warrant. MOS Decker was assigned to the hydro position (it is the position of opening the door by breaking the door jam). MOS Decker did not handcuff the Ps and no canines

On November 9, 2015 at approximately 6:14 PM, the complainant reported to the Metropolitan Police Department that while home she was involved in a verbal altercation with her son (William Nathan Andrews) hereinafter referred to as the defendant, about him playing his music to loud. The complainant went to turn down the music and the defendant grabbed her by the hair and struck her in the face with his face. The defendant the left and tried to return but the door was lock. The complainant went upstairs to call 911. Unable to gain entry back into the home the defendant broke the window with an unknown object and pulled out the AC unit and climbed through the window. Once back inside the home S-1 picked up a hammer and destroyed the, television,