Prosecuting Argument

The prosecution opens their case by making a speech to the jury. He introduces himself and states that he is appearing on behalf of the prosecution and introduces the attorney appearing on behalf of the defence. The prosecution will outline each offence and the evidence the jury will hear in proving this. The prosecutions’ speech sets out the burden of proof and the standard of proof which they have to prove in order to secure a conviction in the case. This is specific to the offence and will be based on the elements of the offence necessary to show the defendant’s guilt. The prosecution’s opening statement is a summary of the case at hand and the evidence in which they intend to adduce to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the defendant indeed committed the crime. Where the prosecution propose to adduce a certain item

In the case of the State v. Stu Dents, the jury found the defendant guilty of the following charges: homicide, assault of a police officer, kidnapping, and crimes related to drugs. They felt that there was no sufficient evidence to charge him with the crime of burglary. It has come down to the sentencing stage of this case. We will hear from both the prosecuting and defending attorneys before the court makes their final ruling on the sentence of one, Mr. Stu Dents.

2. Case Facts: On October 13, 1979, George Schnopps fatally shot his wife of 14 years. The victim and schnopps began having marital problems six months prior, when schnopps became suspicious that his wife was seeing another man. A few days prior to the incident, Schnopps threatened to make his wife suffer. On October 12, 1979 while at work asked a coworker to buy him a gun, telling the worker that he had been receiving threatening phone calls. Schnopps paid his coworker for the gun and ammunition. On the day of the incident, Schnopps told a neighbor he was going to call his wife and have her come pick up some things, and asked if them to keep the youngest child with her so he could talk to with his wife. When the wife went over Schnopps tried to convince his wife to stay with him, in response the wife made some vulgar comments which triggered Schnopps. He then shot her and then shot himself. Shortly after he called the neighbor and told her what had happened and she called the police. The defense offered evidence from friends and coworkers who noticed difference in Schnopps physical and emotional health after the victim had left him. The Commonwealth’s expert

I arrived on scene at approximately 02:11 hours. I approached the front door and the victim, Hollie J. McIntosh (F/W, DOB: 07/26/1988) opened the door and let me inside. I inquired with McIntosh what happened. McIntosh stated she was shoved and choked by her boyfriend, James Dean Carvell (M/W, DOB: 01/25/1988). I observed a red mark on McIntosh’s neck. McIntosh advised Carvell was in the bedroom. McIntosh pointed to the bedroom. I entered the bedroom. Carvell was lying

his argument in the sense that Casey Anthony was indeed a suspect from the start. He

Defendant Hankins filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence on appeal after pleading guilty to felony charges because he argued a Kansas trial court wrongfully considered a deferred judgment from Oklahoma in his sentencing calculation. The State argued that Kansas law required such deferred judgments from other states to be included in sentencing determinations. The Supreme Court of Kansas disagreed with the Court of Appeals’ dismissal of Hankins’ motion, finding that there was a discrepancy between Kansas and Oklahoma’s statutory standards for an entry of a judgment of guilt. Under Kansas law, the Court concluded, a conviction requires a judgment of guilt. However, under Oklahoma law, “an entry of judgment will not be entered for an offender who successfully completes a deferred judgment. The initial conditions are to be imposed ‘without entering a judgment of guilt.’” Therefore, the Court found that no

On December 16, 2013, LVMPD Dispatch received calls from witnesses. One witness stated it appeared woman was being kidnapped, the second witness conveyed they had seen a male and a female arguing, matching the description of the first caller. Officers were dispatched to the area and made contact with the witnesses. The first witnesses stated the female was only wearing a bra and a male, later identified as Evans Tutt, the defendant was physically putting the female into the car. The second witness stated the female was “jumping” out of the vehicle and was bleeding from the face. One of the witnesses was able to provide the license plate number of the vehicle.

Decide which witnesses could support the prosecution’s case and which witnesses would support the defense’s case. How does Search and Seizure relate to the B.I.G. case?

We all do our best to protect what is ours, but how far will we go to do that and will it justify our reasons behind our actions? Whether it’s protecting our properties and possessions, or family or even ourselves, situations get out of hand and we are faced with making decisions that could change our lives and the lives of those around us. The tiniest detail can determine ones actions as justifiable or unjustifiable. For Don Luis Ceballos and Judy-Ann Laws Norman their actions of defense were unjustifiable according to a jury.

THE THE APPELLANT’S STATEMENT OF THE CASE, STATEMENT OF FACTS, AND ARGUMENTS NUMBERED IV-VI ARE BACKED BY EVIDENCE CONTAINED ON THE RECORD. EVEN SOME OF THIS EVIDENCE WERE PROVIDED BY OPPOSING

In 2000, Eddie Lee Howard was convicted of the rape and murder of 84-year-old Georgia Kemp in February 1992. Howard was also convicted in a second trial in 2000 and has been on death row ever since. However, Howard’s case has been called into question. The post conviction hearing was completed, during which the Mississippi Innocence Project represented Howard, making the case that the prosecution’s only physical evidence that links Howard to the crime is a bite mark testimony of forensic odontologist Michael West. When questioned in this most recent meeting, West continuously defended his opinion that the bite marks he claimed to have discovered on Kemp’s body matched the dental molds from Howard. Additionally, West wrote off any statements

For this assignment I got the opportunity to witness the Florida Supreme Court case Thomas Theo Brown V. State of Florida presided over by Chief Justice Jorge Labarga and a panel of other justices. This case was regarding the appeal of Thomas Theo Brown, a Wendy’s employee who was convicted for fatally shooting his co-worker, Ms. Juanese Miller, back in 2009. He had been sentenced to death following the guilty verdict of first degree murder. Mr. Brown filed a challenge to his conviction, wherein he stated a claim that he should be resentenced due to a lack of objection by his original counsel regarding a claim made by the prosecution. The claim not objected to was that the defendant, Mr. Brown, had premeditated the murder in spite of the fact that he had actually admitted to second degree murder.

This is to determine the defendant’s plea of the charges they have been accused with and to repeat their constitutional rights again. For the pleas the defendant can either plead guilty, not guilty, or nolo contendere. If the defendant pleads guilty then they are accepting they have committed the charges that were presented to them. They are also giving up their rights to remain silent and right to a trial. If they plead not guilty then they have are saying that they have not broken the law and feel that they can dismiss the charges for them then he/she should plead not guilty. The defendant is not given a more severe sentence if they are declared guilty at trial after a not guilty

False Imprisonment – elements – (1) confinement without captive’s consent, (2) tortfeasor’s intent to confine victim, (3) confinement for an appreciable length of time, (4) no reasonable means of escape

“On 01/21/2016, police responded to 5 Colin Drive in the City of Portsmouth in reference to an assault. Upon arrival, the victim Willie Mitchell) stated he was sitting on the couch when he noticed suspect 1, Donavan Sneed, standing on the porch and invited him in. He recognized Sneed as the same male that was involved in an incident that occurred an hour prior. The victim stated that when he entered, three additional suspects followed that he did not see in front of the home initially. The suspects were looking for a resident of the home, Courtney Davis, and some of her friends that had assaulted Sneed approximately an hour earlier. The victim assured the suspects that he was alone and the people they were looking for had left. At that time, all four suspects surrounded the victim when suspect 2, Jerry Harding, stated to the victim “You going to do this to my homeboy.” Before the victim could respond that he was not involved with the earlier incident, Sneed started to assault him. The victim attempted to defend himself when the other suspects grabbed his arms and held him. Sneed then punched him in the nose and the victim fell to the ground. The other suspects also began to assault the victim while he was on the ground. While being assaulted on the ground, he felt one of the suspects attempt to remove his wallet from his back pocket. The victim attempted to hold his wallet in his pocket and tell the suspects that he had no