Draper V. US Supreme Court Case Study

The assumption approach is the result of two Supreme Court cases, Horowitz and Ewing. In Horowitz, a medical student brought a due process claim against the University of Missouri-Kansas City for dismissing her for academic reasons. The Supreme Court first discussed whether Horowitz had a protected interest. The Supreme Court noted that the plaintiff never alleged a property interest, but that if she were to do so, she would have to rely upon Missouri state law to have a valid claim. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court assumed the plaintiff had a property interest in her case without deciding the question. Instead of addressing the property interest question, the Supreme Court found that the university provided the plaintiff sufficient process under the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore the Supreme Court never determined whether the student had a property interest in her education.

As children, we have all stepped that “boundary” between right and wrong. From stealing money to shoplifting to fighting, we have all made our parents frustrated, made poor decisions, and perhaps, even made a egregious mistake. However, when does stepping that “boundary” become irremediable? Can the government punish minors under the same criteria they do with adults? And most importantly, what does the United States Constitution say? These are all questions that both the Missouri Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court had to consider when they dived into the case of Roper v. Simmons. To provide a little historical

The University of Texas (UT) understood the importance of diversity; therefore, tried numerous race-neutral strategies to get minorities into their school. Sadly, Texas suffered from segregation at this time (1993), so not many minorities were going to UT. In consequence, Texas legislature passed a race-neutral system (1997) where the top 10% of a high school graduating class would be automatically admitted into UT. Even with the top 10% rule, Studies showed that minorities’, stayed the same and even decreased, due to still segregated public high schools. UT held discussions and meetings to find ways to increase minorities population in their institution. Finally, UT passed a system called holistic review; allowed students who didn’t graduate in the top 10% of the class to have a chance of admission. The system included; an Academic Index (AI), and a Personal Achievement Index (PAI). An applicant’s PAI score is based on two

Gregory Lee Johnson was found guilty of violating Texas state law by burning the American flag at the Republican national convention in Dallas, Texas. The state sentenced Johnson to one year in prison and a fine of $2000. Johnson argued that the right to burn the American flag was protected under the right to free speech in the First Amendment. Johnson appealed the conviction to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District in Dallas. The court upheld the conviction made by the state, and the sentence given to Johnson remained. Johnson then appealed to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and they reversed the decision of the district court and dismissed the charges. The state of Texas then appealed to the Untied States Supreme Court, and the Supreme

Writing in opinion of the court in the case of Fisher V. University of Texas at Austin (II). This case had been previously heard by the Supreme Court resulting in a 7-1 decision that explained the University had no grounds to apply any preference to racial minorities in the application or the acceptance process. The case was reopened at both the fifth circuit court and the Supreme Court. There will be seven justices presiding over this case, with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Elena Kagan recusing herself.

On March 17, 2016, at 1:41 P.M., officer T. Cramblett CPD#1191 was dispatched to he area of Sharon Woods Blvd. and Brookhurst Ave on a narcotics complaint. Radio was advised by a known caller that a white Chevrolet Malibu, occupied by two white females, was parked on the street and were involved in the sales of narcotics. Officer Cramblett was responding to the area when he observed a white Chevrolet Malibu traveling south bound on Beechcroft Rd. Officer G.Meyer CPD# 2333 had also been dispatched on the run, and was traveling north bound on Beechcroft Rd., when he observed the vehicle ,traveling south bound, and aired with radio that it was occupied by two white females. Officers Cramblett observed the vehicle turn east bound onto E. Dublin Granville Rd then initiated a traffic stop just west of Maple Canyon Ave. Officers Cramblett and Myer approached the vehicle and made contact with both occupants advising them of the nature of the stop and asking for

When the Territory of Utah was founded in 1850 by the Mormons, the government established, along with the practice of polygamy, created tension between the United Sates and the territory. The relationship between the two became more strained when the President James Buchanan, declaring Utah to be in a state of rebellion, ordered US soldiers in the territory in 1857. The Mormons living in the Utah territory feared that the soldiers were being sent to annihilate them for their style of living and as a response took up arms in preparation for defending the territory.

P alleges false arrest. P alleges that he was grabbed and arrested by MOS outside his front door. P alleges that MOS informed his cousin that P fits the description. P alleges that he was strip searched at the precinct. MOS Michael Izzo observed two individuals engage in a hand to hand drug transaction inside the lobby of the building and radioed the description of the individuals. Defendant MOS Pizzarro, along with Sgt. Pichardo and MOS Jermaine Taylor observed two individuals who fit MOS Izzo’s description. MOS Pizzarro recognized one of the individuals as P. MOS Pizzarro had previously arrested P. MOS followed the other individuals into the adjacent building and arrested him. MOS recovered drugs from him. MOS Pizzarro came back to 2749

Facts: In Lexington, Kentucky, police officers followed a suspected drug dealer to an apartment building where he went. When they arrived outside of the door to the apartment where the suspect was they reportedly could smell marajuana. The police then knocked and shouted they they were there and in return they could hear what sounded like people destroying the evidence and running around. The police then knocked down the door and saw the respondent as well as drugs laying out without having to look anywhere. later the police found more drugs and paraphernalia doing a more in-depth search. “The Circuit Court denied respondent’s motion to suppress the evidence, holding that exigent

MARSHALL, Texas – The Ladies came back from a two-set deficit, but the Maroon and White could not recover from a strong start in the deciding set by the Tigers as Centenary (2-3) fell to East Texas Baptist (4-1) 25-23, 25-22, 22-25, 25-27, 15-7 Tuesday night, September 5.

I transported Donnerson to the Pasadena City Jail for booking. Prior to entering the jail, I asked Donnerson if he had any additional narcotics in his possession. Donnerson admitted to having more crystal methamphetamine in his right sock. I retrieved a plastic baggie from Donnerson’s right sock, which contained additional crystal methamphetamine.

Joshua and his mother filed a complaint against the DSS, which alleged that the DSS deprived Joshua DeShaney of his liberty without due process, which would be violating his rights under the 14th amendment, by failing to protect him against his father’s abuse which they knew of or should have known of yet didn’t intervene. The district court and the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the respondents’. They held that the Due Process Clause doesn’t require the state to protect its citizens from “private violence or other mishaps not attributable to the conduct of its employees” (DeShaney v. Winnebago). By doing this, the Court of Appeals was overturning several precedents, including Estate of Bailey by Oare v. County of York (1985) and Jensen v. Conrad (1984) which held that once the State has knowledge that a child is in danger of abuse and actually takes action to protect him/her from that danger, a “special relationship” emerges between the State and the child thus imposing a constitutional duty to provide adequate protection. Furthermore, in relation to Martinez v. California, the “casual connection” between the DSS’ conduct and Joshua’s injuries was too diminished to establish a deficiency in his constitutional rights. The Court of Appeals therefore found it unnecessary to answer whether the respondents’ conduct showed the “state of mind” needed to make a due process claim after the precedents set in place by Daniels v. Williams and Davidson v. Cannon.

The distinction between an act and a status would be best described by the case of Robinson v California in which the California statute makes it an offense for a person to “be addicted to the use of narcotics” (Brody and Acker, 2010). The actual act would be using the narcotics which is usually a criminal offense. However, the status would be addicted to narcotics. Just because someone is addicted to narcotics does not mean it is a criminal offense. Just the fact that they use the narcotics is.

On July 25, 2016, I accidentally dropped my assigned I-Phone 5 at 520 King Street near the Deputy's desk near the entrance of the JD&R Court. The estimated cost for the cellular phone is $200.00

If the police feel as though an individual may be transporting drugs, they may use the “drug courier profile” to make the determination. The “drug courier profile” is best described as a situation in which an individual fits the profile of a drug courier based on his or her appearance, mannerisms, luggage, and actions (Ingram, 2009). Other common characteristics among drug couriers are nervousness, where they are traveling to, their method for purchasing tickets, and the amount of luggage they have (Becton, 1987). If an individual fits this profile, then the police have reasonable suspicion that they may be involved in the transportation of drugs.