Death Penalty Case: Andrea V. Andrea Johnson

I arrived on scene and observed several persons on the sidewalk. A male by the name of Kevin Simmons came up to me and stated "Thank god your here officer, I was over at the Turkey Hill and scene this big tall guy attacking these two women. I came across the street to help because he is twice their size and he was really beating on them." I located victims TINA LEWANDOWSKI and AMANDA LEWANDOWSKI, along with them was several other witnesses, all were standing on the sidewalk. The male actor/defendant JOSEPH LEWANDOWSKI had left the scene, going into his apartment before my arrival. TINA is JOSEPH'S wife and AMANDA is JOSEPH'S daughter.

On June 20, 2001 by far one of the most horrific things happened. Five children was drowned in the tub and killed by their mother Andrea Yates (Noah, aged 7; John, aged 5; Paul, aged 3; Luke, aged 2; and Mary, 6 months).

Each year, approximately about 10,000 innocent people in the United States get convicted of serious crimes that they did not commit. And at least four percent of them receive the death penalty being completely innocent. Scenarios like this happen all the time because there are more and more false persecutions each day which can be easily avoided. Many people are occupying prisons all over the world, for felonies they did not execute. More than 200 people have been exonerated through DNA testing nationwide. But why do these wrongful convictions keep happening?

On the night of October 3rd, 1974 at approximately 10:45 p.m. Edward Garner was shot by Officer Hymon in an attempt to stop him from escaping a crime scene. Garner died on the operating table due to the gunshot wound on the back of his head. His crime was burglary and he was found with a mere ten dollars and a purse. The case was argued on October 30th, 1984 and a decision was made on March 27th, 1985. The father of Edward Garner believed his son’s constitutional rights were violated by the defendants Officer Hymon, the Police Department, and the Mayor of the city of Memphis. With a 6-3 decision, the Justices’ decided that Officer Hymon was acting justly under the fourth amendment that states that deadly force is constitutional as long as it is “reasonable”. I believe Officer Hymon was acting in good faith and simply fulfilling his duty to protect the public and stop criminals from escaping punishment.

New Jersey v. T.L.O, a supreme court case that took the stands in 1985, involved a fourteen year old freshman in highschool and a New Jersey public high school in which the minor attended. The minor by which public record only shows her by her initials T.L.O, was caught smoking cigarettes with another student in her high school’s bathroom during the school day. This act of smoking in the bathroom was against school policy as it was only seen fit to smoke in the school’s designated smoking areas. This court case was used to argue students rights in searches in public schools.

In light of these legal changes, officers needed to construct their domestic violence cases under the assumption that the victim would not be participating in the prosecution. The case commenced at the time the call was received by dispatch up until the case was presented to a judge or jury. Therefore, officers needed to complete the proper procedures to secure recordings of the calls made to the 911 dispatch center to report the domestic situation. In addition to having the subject, victim and/or witnesses complete written and/or video statements, the officer must diligently identify, collect, and photograph evidence at the crime scene (Ellison, 2002). This required officers to visit the victim several days later to photograph bruising, because some bruising

Through my research on this critical thinking paper I have learned that the quality of the defendant’s defense lawyer is perhaps the single

Why would the Indiana Attorney General wade into a United States Supreme Court case over the opening prayers said at town council meetings in western New York state?

This case analysis of Texas v. Gregory Lee Johnson was a Supreme Court case that overthrew bans on damaging the American flag in 48 of the 50 states. Gregory Lee Johnson participated in a political demonstration during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, where he burned the American flag. Consequently, Johnson was charged with violating the Texas law that bans vandalizing valued objects. However, Johnson appealed his conviction, and his case

Miller v. Johnson 1995 was a United States Supreme Court Case that decided whether racial gerrymandering was unconstitutional or not. This issue was very controversial, but before being able to understand how the case affected the use of racial gerrymandering, one has to understand what gerrymandering is. Every state is made up of different districts, and each district is entitled to their own votes when it comes to elections. Gerrymandering is the manipulation of district boundaries in a way that creates a political advantage in elections by putting a large group of people who are likely to vote for a certain party in one district.

This essay is about the supreme court case between Gregory Lee Johnson and the state of Texas. Johnson burned an American flag in public and was arrested. This action was against Texas law. Johnson argued that this was a form of speech which is protected by the first amendment. The content of this essay will consist of the case, the arguments of the case, and the precedent cases.

I think Texas needs to discriminate certain behaviors. Many people spent so many years in prison waiting to be executed. I think the government needs to reduce the waiting period for only those people who they are sure that they committed the crime and needs to be executed. Most of the time it’s unfair because those people spend their years waiting and enjoying in prison while the family members are still waiting for justice. It’s unfair that sometimes the family members don’t even witness the justice because they die before the person who committed the crime is executed. The Texas government also needs to reduce jail length for people arrested because of possession of drugs. The government needs to punish them, instead of putting them in

III. Statement Facts: The respondent was involved in a political demonstration where he had drenched the American flag with kerosene and lit it on fire. Respondent was charged and convicted of the illegal act of desecration of the flag. The criminal appeals reversed the conviction and said that petitioner could not prosecute the respondent for burning the flag as a part of political speech because it was his use of the first amendment. “Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to determine whether the conviction was consistent with U.S. constitution amendment, The Supreme Court found that it was not” The Court held that petitioner 's interest in preventing breaches of the peace did not support respondent 's conviction because his conduct did not threaten to disturb the peace. Plus, petitioner 's interest in preserving the flag as a symbol of society and our nation did not justify the criminal conviction for involving his self in political expression.

Demonstrators marched through the streets, chanting slogans, and held protest outside the offices of several corporations. The purpose of the demonstration was to protest policies of the Regan Administration and of certain corporations based in Dallas. In a political demonstration during the Republican National Convention in Texas, Gregory Lee Johnson doused an American flag with kerosene and set it on fire. During the burning of the flag, the demonstrators shouted, “America, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you.” No one was hurt but some witnesses said they were offended. One witness picked up the flag’s charred remains and buried them in his backyard. Johnson was charged and convicted with the desecration of a venerated object, in violation

In March 2, 1963, eighteen-year-old Barbara Ann Johnson was accosted by a man who shoved her into his car, tied her hands and ankles, and drove her to the edge of the city, where he raped her. He then drove Johnson to a street near her home, letting her out of the car and asking that she pray for him. Phoenix police later picked up Ernesto Miranda for investigation of the Johnson’s rape and included him in a lineup at the police station. Miranda was identified by several women one of them identified him as the man who had robbed her at knifepoint a few months earlier, and Johnson thought he was the rapist. At trial, Miranda’s court-appointed attorney got the officers to admit that during the interrogation the defendant was not informed of his