Disciplinary Board V. Cannon Case Study

On the fourth of July in 1776 the United States became an independent nation. At that point in time, the foundation for a formal legal system was put into place. One of the oldest sources of law is the common law, which dates back to the colonial days. In the case of Davis v. Baugh, the common law rule was used in the first court trial. Common law refers back to precedent cases of similar disputes and assists the judge in making a decision after comparing both cases. Utilizing this ruling to resolve disputes in court is very helpful because it provides uniformity in court. This rule also provides an expectation of what the verdict will be based off the prior cases. Most importantly, common law allows the judge to remain neutral without the implication of personal bias on each case (Meiners, 2012, pp. 9-10).

2c. The Iowa Supreme Court referred to another case involving attorney plagiarism (Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics & Conduct v. Lane). In that case, the punishment for attorney Lane (suspension of his license to practice) was more severe than the punishment imposed on attorney Cannon. What distinction did the court make between these two cases? Do you agree with the court’s reasoning?

The case is brought to the Supreme Court by the Plaintiff Charles Baker suing Secretary of State of Tennessee Joe Carr, for the failure to redraw the legislative voting boundaries, something that was due over 60 years prior. A law that Tennessee legislature apportioned both houses and provided reapportionment every ten years on the basis of the population reported by the census, but failed to do since 1901. Baker argued that the population had shifted from the rural areas to the urban areas and that he himself was being affected and was being denied his equal protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. He sought to the court that that the state officials should hold an at-large election or they should halt the election process until the

The evident was not shown to the effect of the school teacher statement regarding the school administration. But

David Leon Riley was pulled over by a police officer for a driving a vehicle with expired license tags. The police officer who initially stopped Riley discovered that his driver’s license had also been suspended. Following department procedures, the police officer then continued to impound his vehicle. Before the car was impounded, the police officers are required to do an inventory of all of the components of the vehicle to prevent being liable for any missing items after the car is recovered, as well as, to discover any illegal or dangerous items. During the vehicle search, officers found two handguns under the hood of Riley’s vehicle and then proceeded to arrest Riley for the possession of firearms. When the arresting officer conducted a person’s search of Riley, it was found that Riley had a cell phone in his pocket. The cell phone was taken by police and taken back to the station where an analyst discovered data on Riley’s cell phone that was ultimately used to tie Riley to a drive-by shooting that had occurred a few weeks earlier. Based on the pictures and video recovered by the detective analyst specializing in gangs, and ballistics tests conducted on the two hand guns found in Riley’s vehicle, the state of California charged Riley in connection with the shooting. The arresting officer accessed data stored on Riley’s cell phone and noticed a repeated term associated with a street gang.

The court rejects the previous test used to decide Free Exercise cases, the Sherbert test. The state no longer had to prove a “compelling interest” for legislation nor that it was the “least restrictive means” of regulation.

In the case of Stromberg V. California, Yetta Stromberg was arrested for violating a California law enacted in 1919.  The law made it a crime to have a red flag displayed as a sign, symbol, or an emblem of not supporting an organized government, in a public meeting area. Stromberg was arrested when working around San Bernardino, California, at a summer camp for young Communists. The camp was raided on August 3, 1929 by American Legion members who were led by George H. Johnson, the district attorney of San Bernardino. This raid was brought by the Better America Federation of Los Angeles and the Intelligence Bureau of the Los Angeles Police Department.  The raiders seized a red flag and found a cardboard box that contained sheet music and Communist

Similar to the aforementioned case, Kevin n. Stanford v. Missouri, this story involves a young man by the name of Christopher Simmons as well as two other young men, Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer. At the time of the incident Simmons was still a junior high school, he was 17 years of age, Charles Benjamin was 15 years of age and John Tessmer was then 16. Simmons encouraged both Benjamin and Tessmer to assist him with committing murder. Records indicate that Simmons was in fact the instigator of the crime. Simmons plan was to “commit burglary and murder by breaking and entering, tying up a victim, and throwing the victim off a bridge.” Simmons assured both Benjamin and Tessmer that once the crime was committed they could “get away with it”

Our ability to admit that the federal government played a role in this segregation, allowed us to treat the situation. Now that we face racism and segregation that is much more hidden and attributed to other factors and causes, it makes us more difficult to identify de jure segregation, but it is still ultimately essential for us to do so in order to see any form of advancement. The Supreme Court’s support in this case brought about nearly free reign in the District Court’s regulation and enforcement capabilities.

After the end of the Civil War, the state of Georgia believed they deserved 35 million acres of land, so they claimed those 35 million acres of land from the Yazoo river which belong to the Native Americans. So basically, the land was kind of stolen. In the year 1795, the state legislator for Georgia sold those 35 million acre of state land to 4 private land companies for the price of 1.5 cent per acre. In 1796, a new legislator for Georgia found out that the previous legislators of Georgia who voted to sell parcels of the 35 million acres of land were stockholders in the companies that sold the land. The legislator also discovered that they were bribed in helping to re-sell the land for a higher amount while committing fraud and corruption.

The US Supreme court wanted to deem what Native Americans were in the evolution of the United States of America, in just they really wanted to change the stance on tribal sovereignty that fit the US. Before set laws the only ways to deal with Native Americans were through wars, bullied negotiations and forced treaties to acquire all land. Treaties functioned as the most important documentation describing the relationship between Europeans and Natives. This continued until the courts began to bring specific meaning to these laws that were recognized through the courts of the US. A land title definition to the Europeans politics was that Indian’s had land to give and was for private individuals to receive. So there was a need to regulate these

I find this court decision to relate to officers using body cameras similar to the “Monday Quarterbacking” seen on popular broadcasts such as ESPN. Here, annalists play small clips of a quarterbacks Sunday performance over and over and judge that person’s actions based solely on those clips. When this occurs to an officer by playing body cam footage over and over the officer’s actions can be unfairly judged. In Graham v. Connor, the court says the totality of the circumstances must be taking into account, unfortunately many people and courts only use fact-based tests to come to conclusions (Gold, 2015). However, the U.S. Supreme Courts stands firm under Graham v. Connor that inquiries to officers actions must be flexible and each incident

So far, the discussion I have had the strongest reaction during, is the one that occurred after the Julea Ward v. Board of Regents of Eastern Michigan University case was brought to the attention of the class. This case is an example of ethical issues which are referenced during A.11. Termination and Referral, specifically A.11.b. Values Within Termination and Referral. Ward was in direct conflict with the ACA Code of Ethics, when she referred a prospective client based on her personally held values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors against homosexuality. Even though this case occurred during 2009, it struck a chord with me because religious freedom issues have been extremely relevant in the news recently. For example, I have recently heard of at least two states, Georgia and Mississippi, that have introduced different bills to legislature surrounding the topic of religious freedom and passed them into law.

Seidman addresses an IRS summons issued to an accounting firm for documents related to work the firm performed for a corporation under IRS investigation. Among the documents the IRS requested was a log containing the identities of investors in potentially abusive tax shelters. The investors petitioned to intervene and assert that revealing their identities was a violation of the tax advice privilege. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of the investors’ claim, holding that the investors failed to show that confidential communications would be revealed if their identities were disclosed to the IRS. Because federal regulations require that accounting firms maintain

The three chapters provide an essential theory as to why justices in the Supreme Court decide the way they do. The author names such theory as strategic account which is composed of three main categories: actions taken to accomplish a goal, strategic interaction, and the structure of the institution. However, actions taken to accomplish a goal and the justice’s strategic interaction will mainly be discussed.