Courtroom Case Analysis

Dan Locallo is a very contradicting man. When he began his career as a prosecutor he was anything but polite to the defense lawyers. Locallo himself describes himself as “kind of an asshole” towards defense lawyers (Courtroom 302, 59). During his time as a prosecutor, Dan Locallo became intrigued by the opportunity to become a judge. When Steve Bogira asked Locallo why he wanted to become a judge, his reply seemed simple. Locallo claimed that he never wanted to become a judge because of a “power-trip” he does claim that “the power of attraction was a great influence” (Courtroom 302, 59). However, Locallo admits that the real reason why he wanted to become a judge was because he would have the “ability to make decisions, to do

Throughout the course of this investigation, the following courthouse was researched to locate any all court documentation for Dennis Baker and Charlotte Baker, as the search was expanded to include Shawna Thornton’s affiliation with the Bakers’.

On February 12, 1909, the NAACP, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, was founded. The NAACP was founded in response to the 1908 race riot in Springfield, Illinois and the terrible practice known as lynching. Their goal was to secure the rights, for all people, guaranteed to people in the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments in the United States Constitution. Even though some of the most important wins in court happened when Charles Hamilton Houston was the leader, his student, Thurgood Marshall, won some important ones too ("NAACP Legal History", NAACP.org). This essay is going to focus on some of the court cases that were fought when Marshall was in charge ( Janken, Kenneth R. "The Civil Rights Movement: 1919-1960s")

The jury selection process is a significant portion of the trial process. Jury selection ensures that courts maintain proper Due Process and comply with constitutional guidelines. Furthermore, it gives lawyers the ability to evaluate the people in the jury and determine how they would feel about the case. The trial process branches out into six steps: jury selection, opening statements, presentation of evidence, closing arguments, charging of the jury and deliberation of jury. Throughout the process of jury selection, potential jury is based on a process names an voir dire; otherwise known as committing to telling the truth. During voir dire, potential jurors are included in

Did the trial court err when it did not deem as admitted facts the allegations made by the Defendant in his Seconded Amended Complaint in accordance with MD Rule 2-323(e), which caused a violation of the Defendant’s fourteenth amendment rights?

The trial court erred and abused its discretion in granting the State’s motion to admit evidence of prior uncharged incidents of domestic violence, because the evidence denied Mr. Davis of his rights to due process of law as guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and Article I, Section 10 of the Missouri Constitution, in that the evidence was more prejudicial than probative because it was too remote in time to be relevant to the charged crimes and had a prejudicial effect.

While at GPM, I attended a session of Treatment Accountability Court (“TAC”) (formerly Mental Health Court) and DUI/Drug Court. Both Courts operate similarly. Several hours before the court session, members of the legal community meet to discuss the progress of each participate scheduled to appear that day. Legal representatives include members from the Sheriff’s Office, Solicitor General’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, the judge who presides over the proceeding, a Program Coordinator & Counselor, a misdemeanor probation officer, and a felony probation officer. The group discusses the status of each participate and whether they’re meeting the conditions set forth by the court. The programs are conducted in phases,

Now comes the Defendant, Joseph Bettina, files this Motion For temporary Support and would shows:

In my opinion, the charges should have been dismissed against the individuals that pleaded guilty through plea bargain. The reason is that the lawsuit was able to illustrate that the prosecutor was racially motivated to incarcerated American Americans, even if they were innocent. Secondly, there was no strong evidence introduced that would uphold a conviction. The tape recordings that they had were alleged to drug transition occurring, however, you could not hear anything but noise in the background. In addition, the credibility of the confidential informant was questioned, because his stories was switching back and forth indicating that it was possibly fabricated. Lastly, the military drug sweep was achieved unlawfully without the use of

Kelsey, I follow your train of thought in that American’s should have health insurance because the health care system is a nationwide, comprehensive financial issue that impacts the individual premium holder, to the providers, hospitals, and medical supply and drug companies, the state and federal governments, and health insurance providers. The one thing I learned from these readings especially the 11th Circuit Court decision is that even if a person does not want or has insurance, it still impacts everyone else when they require unexpected care. It creates cost-shifting problems that everyone else has to pick up the tab for. In the reading, the Court identifies the perspective in which Congress was coming from by defining on page 15 that

1) The Court said that the picketing pertained to a matter of public concern because their signs were stating issues regarding the moral conduct of the U.S. as a whole and the fate of these moral judgements. The Court stated that Phelps and his followers were speaking on matters of public concern on public property and therefore was entitled to the protection under the First Amendment.

The Eleventh Circuit found that the Commission’s selection process in 2003-2004 “categorically excluded” certain faiths from the list of potential invocational speakers for meetings of the planning commission. Id. at 1282. In addition, the court found that the Commission’s selection of invocational speakers was not based on an impermissible motive because it included diverse religious institutions. Id. at 1278 ( citing Marsh 463 U.S. at 793-94).

Would filing a diversity jurisdiction lawsuit in federal district court in the Southern District of Florida result in Rule 11, 28 U.S.C. §1927, or some other violations when the defendant resides in Minnesota? It depends. It depends on whether the court will exercise discretion to sanction. The court would likely to sanction Ms. Rodriguez’s lawyer under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. §1927 due to the motives of “home court” advantage and to inconvenience Paulsen. Ms. Rodriguez has meet subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction can be waived by Paulsen as can venue, and the choice of law would be Minnesota state law since the contract was created and breached in Minnesota.

In the United States so much is constantly changing within our society. Our perception has changed and continues to do so and as they do so does everything else. When how we think changes our society changes. When our society changes the way our society operates changes. This is true in any facet of our society in the United States and pertains to every aspect in which we operate. These issues are not limited to us as a society; they also extend into our criminal justice system and our court systems. In this paper we will take a look into issues that currently face our court systems. We will attempt to identify the current and future issues that face our courts and court administrators in our society today. In our analysis we will attempt to

On Wednesday, April 6, I attended a court hearing at the Sonoma County Superior Court. At 8:15am I sat out in front of court room one, many of the people there were reading this paper out on the front of the court room which was the criminal calendar. Which sets the time and date to be called to in court. I entered court room one, which were all felony trials that were taking place. We all took our seats and sat down before the honor of Robert M. Laforge. To the right in front of me were the people who were being prosecuted, eight of them were males and two were females. Some of them had the same attorney who appointed to act for them in front of the judge. While in the court room I noticed many of their family members, or people whom they might have known in the court sitting beside me. First we had the arraignment which is when each of the criminals came before the court and the judge read out the criminal charges that were against them. Each of the defendants had a counsel appointed to them. After having read the charges to the defendant, a court appearance date was set, in which most of them were a preliminary hearing because most of the charges against the criminal were felonies. Many of the cases that were going out had to schedule for a preliminary trial which is a trial before a trial to see if the defendant is guilty or not guilty, and if there is even enough evidence to actually hold a trial. Most of the cases I observed were in the case of assault, in which one