Nix V. Whiteside Case Summary

The sixth amendment of the Bill of Rights is about how an accused person has the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, the right to control witnesses against that person, and the right to a lawyer for their defense. This means that a suspect of a crime has the right to a fast and public trial by an impartial jury, the right to meet witnesses against the person, and the right to a lawyer to aid them. For example, a person does not have to wait for 20 years just for their trial like in the old times, now they can now have a fast trial and publicize it if they want. The accused also have the right to challenge the witness and they get the choice of having a lawyer or not. My argument for this amendment is that the accused do

Many believe that photographic arrays should include the defendant's legal counsel. However, some do not believe it is necessary. The Sixth Amendment, as interpreted by the court, states that an arrestee or defendant has no Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a photographic array (Ingram,

Mr. Strahn’s decision to deny the Whites’ request within 23 minutes of his receipt of the same and his failure to make any further inquiry regarding the nature of Greg White’s disability, particularly given his admission that the Whites’ could not know what information the Board required to make a decision regarding their request, and the minimal effort it would have taken to make such an inquiry, is damning. The Association’s continued conduct in fining and attempting foreclosure on the Whites’ home, in light of these and numerous other failures will undoubtedly paint the Defendants in a poor light before any reasonable jury.

It is the right of every citizen in this nation to have his or her case decided by a fair and impartial jury. The selection of the jury panel is one of great importance and one that can have a great effect on the outcome of the case. Therefore, it is obvious that the attorneys have a

Defendant was the alleged perpetrated a shooting subsequently the victim expired. The defense attorney requested a motion prohibiting the government from mentioning or offering into evidence any testimony regarding his prior criminal conviction for assault causing serious bodily injury, except to be brought forth in the court of Records. The defendant has previous assault and criminal convictions on his record and the attorney requested this to be suppressed.

The primary source of the right to counsel is the Sixth Amendment. It states in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for defence. In this article, the development of the right to council will be discussed as well as when the right to council attaches to criminal procedures. The right to self- representation and the role of attorneys as it applies to right to council will be discussed as well.

Horrigan, B, _Adventures in Law & Justice: exploring the big legal questions in Everyday Life_, Lawbook Company, Sydney, 2003

Gideon’s Trumpet discusses a trial that may or may not have been done fairly. Clarence Earl Gideon believes that he was denied due process of law because he was not appointed a judge. As some may not, it is always protocol for the defendant to have a judge, does not matter if it is the best lawyer or the worst. Gideon filed his appeal and won. The process was long; it took thirty days for the opposing side to reply. Judges are allowed to review both sides to see exactly what is being discussed and if it is worth taking to court. When the reply had finally come in, on April 9, within the thirteen-page document states, “Gideon did not have the right to counsel under the rules of Betts vs Brady.” Betts vs Brady is a case that was tried almost seventy-four years ago. The defendant was the denied the right to an attorney by law enforcement and by the judge. The Supreme Court had taken their sixth amendment from them. Gideon, however, fought hard for his appeal.

As a lawyer, their personal and ethical values should not influence how they feel about a case but must be set to the side to best represent their defendant. Lawyers must defend their client, even if they feel like they are guilty and represent them the best way they can in the court of law and prove the defendants’ innocent. Every defendant has a right to counsel, a right to an attorney, and a right to a fair trial. Lawyers support the laws on the books and enforce the laws in action because it is about representing their client to their best ability. As a lawyer, it is important to protect the client’s interests and encourage them to tell the truth although the truth can hurt them sometimes in some cases.

When deliberating upon legal quandaries law students and attorneys engage upon a five-component process to scrutinize all the dynamics of a legal premise(s). Litigators and law students denote this process as IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion). Therefore, IRAC is simply the blueprint for analyzing a legal dispute. While legal dilemmas can become tedious, time-consuming, overwhelming, and extremely complex, IRAC methodology can make the process somewhat easier. Hence, IRAC process forces the litigator to apply critical thinking (Metzler, 2003). Furthermore, Metzler states, the litigator must have a comprehensive understanding of the following:

Reasoning plays an important role in judicial decision-making. No matter how many precedent cases, guidelines, and statutes may exist, reasoning will always be essential because it allows these factors to be interpreted on a case by case basis; this is necessary because statutes are too limited to be able to cover every

For this discussion, this learner will explicate the importance of precedent within our common law and the accompanying concepts of stare decisis and distinguishing cases. Then this learner will provide an example of a U.S. Supreme Court case that was decided in light of one of these concepts. Draw a distinction between reliable and questionable sources on the Internet.

"Law is most commonly seen in old and modern day tv shows with criminal being thrown behind bars or perhaps in the news with the difficult legal system that no one adheres to anymore,," said lawyer John Adkins in an interview. My interest in law began when I was a young girl. I would check out books whose subjects ranged from law in general to actual criminal cases both solved and unsolved. My mind would drink in all the details from the evidence, to the trial, and finally to the conviction of the accused. One day, I was allowed to check out a DVD of a solved case in which the defendant was found not guilty of the sudden and mysterious death of his wife. I was intrigued by hearing and arguments of both sides. Convinced of the mans guilt, I set out on my own little investigation which yielded little more than the awakening of my interest then and there.

appellate brief for Legal Research and Writing in the spring of this year. The experience of

“The court creates the lawyer through its acts of admitting a person to the bar and binding her to its service through her sworn oath: without the court’s acts, no one can act as a lawyer—thus, no one can represent a party before it.” A lawyer is required to exert discretion in the application of the legal services in which they