Cja354 Week 2 - Criminal Defense Case Analysis Essay
1448 Words6 Pages
Criminal Defense Case Analysis CJA/354
Criminal Defense Case Analysis
We all do our best to protect what is ours, but how far will we go to do that and will it justify our reasons behind our actions? Whether it’s protecting our properties and possessions, or family or even ourselves, situations get out of hand and we are faced with making decisions that could change our lives and the lives of those around us. The tiniest detail can determine ones actions as justifiable or unjustifiable. For Don Luis Ceballos and Judy-Ann Laws Norman their actions of defense were unjustifiable according to a jury.
Professor Joshua Dressler argues that the various legal standards for protection of the dwelling make little…show more content… Stephen did admit to breaking in and attempting to steal, but was unsure if he was going to follow through with the robbery.
In defense, Mr. Ceballos pleaded that if he were present his actions would have been the same. To stop or hurt the person that was trying to take what is rightfully his. Mr. Ceballos argued that his actions were justifiable because Stephen had come to his home previously attempting burglary and this second time he was prepared. Evidence of the previous break in that happened in March of the same year and testimonies do show that Stephen was there with an attempt to commit another crime, burglary. But the jury argues that had Mr. Ceballos been present for the incident his actions would have been justified due to the nature of the crime that was about to be committed. Had he been present there would have been cause for excessive force to defend his home, property, and himself. However, Stephen and Robert were the only people on the property and were not armed and there was no excuse for excessive/deadly force. In U.S. Courts, the law claims that it is illegal for anyone to own a deadly mechanical device that could bring harm or even death to the lives of those that are innocent or law enforcement officials who are acting within the scope of their employment. Concluding the case, Mr. Ceballos defense was not justifiable because he was not present for the incident and had he been present, he would have assessed