Moot Court Problem

For the purpose of this report, a visit to the Melbourne Magistrate's Court was made on 22nd March, 2016. On this day, the second day of a four day committal hearing was heard regarding the matter of Omer Cicekdag, presided over by Magistrate Ann Collins.

Explain how the legal standard of reasonable suspicion applied to the site administrator’s search of the student’s private property.

The district court ruled against Mr. Comerford’s claim that the evidence brought against him was unconstitutional. For the purpose of this legal argument, Knotts v. U.S., Kyllo v. U.S, and Katz v. U.S. will be used to suggest to the Court that Comerford had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his evening drug runs, and Smith v. Maryland will be used to prove that there is no expectation of privacy regarding the phone numbers dialed. Together, these two cases prove that the government agents were not conducting an illegal search by tracking Comerfords location using The Chum, and that the evidence gathered by this investigation may be used against Comerford in a Court of law.

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’.

They appealed on penalty, The hearing officer made fundamental errors in both principals and law. She considered disciplinary matters for 1999 and 2000 which clearly postdated 1997 offence, when making the decision of the 12 day suspension she clearly had antecedents in her mind. Clearly they where not antecedents and should not have been considered. After getting a new hearing they decided that

Therefore, this is a final order and it was proper for the father to file his Notice of Appeal within 30 days from March, 16, 2016. The father entered the Notice of Appeal on March 26, 2016, ten (10) days after. Consequently, this Court has jurisdiction to heard this case, which was filed in a timely manner.

Even if we assume that Shahmaleki does have a property interest in his continued enrollment then there is still no due process issue as the University provided Shahmaleki sufficient process under the law. Students in disciplinary settings are only entitled to “some kind of notice and afforded some kind of hearing”. Universities normally should provide students notice of the charges, an explanation of the evidence against them and an opportunity to present their side of the story. These are not rigid requirements, though, as due process is flexible and tailored to the specific facts of a case. In determining what is enough process, courts balance the student’s

An appeal in the criminal law system is a defendant’s way of challenging the court’s decision. In this paper I will discuss what an appeal is, how it factors into the overall procedures and process of the criminal system. How the appeals process may be improved. Steps in the appeals process and an example case of an appeal. And why the example case appeal did or did not succeed.

Plaintiffs move this Court pursuant Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) for summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, on the grounds that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Caldwell presents three allegations of error. Caldwell contends that the circuit court erred by denying Caldwell’s motion for a mistrial when State’s witnesses discussed evidence that had been suppressed. Additionally, Caldwell asserts that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction for conspiracy to commit a burglary of the Alkaline Water Company. Finally, Caldwell alleges that the imposition of two convictions and sentences for conspiracy violate the double jeopardy clause of the U.S. Constitution. The State contends that the circuit court did not err in denying Caldwell’s motion for a mistrial, and that his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was not preserved. The State, however, agrees that it was improper for

In order to be able to appeal, we have to find out if there was a legal error that occurred in the trial court, and that such an error was material, thus, it would have changed the outcome of the trial.

The last court hearing on 2/25/2014was dismissed due to a technicality of my paper work not being correct, because I did not know what I was doing. I am not an attorney and can not afford one.

" The case involves gun ownership rights in relation to gun ownership and use in the state of Massechutes. Private gun ownership and self defence has been a bone of of contention in legislative and judicial platforms in the US. Individual states have various legislation relating to gun ownership that are in effect in the respective states. The ownership and use of guns by individual have varied implication. A citizen 's right to feel safe and secure is enshrined in the constitution and the acquisition of weapons by individuals for their private protection has been a subject of debate due to reckless use,

A bench of the Supreme Court has in Bankura Municipality v. Lalji Raja and Sons[2] held that:

The Supreme Court of India has adopted a forward-looking approach since last few years, particularly having regard to the socio-economic conditions prevailing in the country. In fact there are two kinds of approaches which characterise the functioning of the highest Court in every