Rudolph's Court Case Study

Rinaker vs Superior Court case is a juvenile delinquency proceeding minors, Christopher G. and Huy D, are charged with committing vandalism. Minors were allegedly convicted with throwing rocks at Arsenio Torres’s car. Torres later brought a civil harassment case against the minors, which began the process of mediation in an effort to resolve the civil harassment action.

When a person takes steps toward the commission of a crime and has a specific intent to commit the crime, but for unforeseen reasons is unable to complete the crime the person has committed the crime of Attempt (Jirard, 2009). In the case of the State of Indiana versus Donald J. Haines, emergency personnel including two police officers [Dennis and Hayworth] along with emergency medical technicians [Garvey and Robinson] responded to Mr. Haines’s apartment for a report of a possible suicide that just occurred. When officers Dennis and Hayworth arrived at Haines’s apartment they discovered him lying face down in a pool of blood. Officer Dennis noticed that both of Haines’s wrists were cut and were bleeding. When Haines heard the paramedics he stood up, and began screaming at Dennis that he has AIDS and that he should be left to die. Dennis advised Haines that he was there to help him, and Haines told Dennis that he wanted to fuck him so that he could give him AIDS. Haines than told Dennis that he was going to utilize his wounds to spray blood on him, and began to jerk back and forth causing his infected blood to get into Dennis’ mouth and eyes. Haines told Dennis that he could not deal with having AIDS, but that he was going to make him deal with it.

The Question: Has the Plaintiff, Linda D. Daugherty, included the operative facts for cause of action in her claim against the Defendants, Casual Lifestyles Realty, Inc. and Rauleigh J. Ringer, or has said Plaintiff insufficiently stated the facts, therefore making indefinite allegations and validating the move for a more definite statement? Or, is it that, the mechanisms of discovery could be an open alternative to the Defendants, which would aid in gathering any information needed for the defense to frame a response to said Plaintiff, therefore invalidating the Motion pursuant to Rule 12(E) of Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure?

The result from Gideon. V Wainwright court case affected the decision of the betts. Bradley which eventually was overruled. Also that justice black associated who wrote the pinion for the court called this an “obvious truth” where that a fair trial for a poor defendant could not be guaranteed without the assistance of counsel.

(2) Whether there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant's conduct was willful and wanton in injuring plaintiff.

Within certain circumstances, liability is based on the accused 's action, which is also known as an act of omission or negative act. Regardless of the defendant 's motive, the failure to act supports a finding of criminal liability only when the s/he is under a binding legal duty, has the necessary knowledge to behave aptly and carrying out his or her responsibility is possible. Even so, there are instances when the issue of guilt results from a lack thereof. Each element must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and decided as a matter of law by the court. With regard to any crime, all criminal elements are distinguishable and identifiable for the careful analysis of each issue. Take for example the difference between points of dispute in Proctor v. State (1918) and People v. Newton (1973) when reading Criminal Law: Cases and Methods.

Pamela Powers on December 24, 1968 was kidnapped from a YMCA in Des Moines, Iowa and then murdered. A 14-year-old boy reported having had helped Robert Anthony Williams (defendant) car door and said he saw two skinny and white legs. His car and Pamela’s clothing were found the next day. William was found two days later in a town 70 miles away. During transport one of the officers inculcated William to tell them where to find the body in order for the child’s parents to have a Christian burial. William gave in and led them to the body consequently admitting to knowledge of the crime. In that same day (December 26), the Iowa

The case study of The Thompson family presented in Chapter 10 of our textbook, “Essentials of Human Behavior” delivers a scenario that many individuals longing to become parents are faced with in life. As the wife of a retired military Staff Sergeant, this case study is a reminder of my experience of my husband’s two deployments to Iraq. The Life course perspective gives an outline of how people’s lives are shaped by different life events that we have abso1utely no control over and the also the challenges associated with managing the stressors of life. In this case study I will analyze the challenges that Will and Felicia Thompson are faced with in their transition of parenthood.

Dan Locallo is a very contradicting man. When he began his career as a prosecutor he was anything but polite to the defense lawyers. Locallo himself describes himself as “kind of an asshole” towards defense lawyers (Courtroom 302, 59). During his time as a prosecutor, Dan Locallo became intrigued by the opportunity to become a judge. When Steve Bogira asked Locallo why he wanted to become a judge, his reply seemed simple. Locallo claimed that he never wanted to become a judge because of a “power-trip” he does claim that “the power of attraction was a great influence” (Courtroom 302, 59). However, Locallo admits that the real reason why he wanted to become a judge was because he would have the “ability to make decisions, to do

Clarence Earl Gideon, a man with an 8th grade education who caused an influence from within a prison cell. Gideon has been in and out of jail numerous times for nonviolent crimes ever since fleeing from his home while he was in the 8th grade. He was charged with attempted misdemeanor, and was taken to court. He appeared without a lawyer, since he was not very wealthy at all. Infact, he was extremely poor. Gideon requested that he be given an attorney to defend him. According to the 6th Amendment, the accused has the right to a lawyer. However, the court of Florida denied him of it because they said that only citizens that have committed capital offenses have the right to jury. Gideon tried his best to represent himself without an attorney,

Why would the Indiana Attorney General wade into a United States Supreme Court case over the opening prayers said at town council meetings in western New York state?

Another Supreme Court case which was very popular when it was being tried, and still is today, is the case of Gideon v. Wainwright. In this case, which was decided on March 18, 1963, a man named Clarence Gideon was denied his sixth amendment right to an attorney. Gideon was arrested in Florida in 1961 for breaking and entering into a pool hall with the intent of committing another crime there. When he asked for an attorney to represent him because he couldn’t afford one, he was denied of his Sixth Amendment right. When asked why, he was told that by Florida State Law, the only time an attorney is appointed to the accused is when a person is charged with a capital offense. Gideon put together a defense as best he could, and represented himself during trial. As can be expected from a man with no law experience, he lost his case and was found guilty. He was sentenced to five years in prison, until he filed a habeas corpus petition; meaning a petition saying he was wrongly imprisoned (pbs.org). When this case went to the Supreme Court, Gideon argued that he was violated of his Sixth Amendment right to an attorney, regardless of the status of his case. The Supreme Court ruled in a 9-0 decision, the right to an attorney should be given in all criminal prosecutions (oyez.org). This was a huge case for the criminal justice system simply because it allowed for fair representation for everyone. There were no longer people who went to jail simply because of the fact that they

In 1961, Clarence Earl Gideon was charged with breaking and entering into a pool hall in Florida. When he went to trial, he attempted to get an attorney to help him in court to get his crime reduced to a misdemeanor. The judge denied the attempt and he was left to fend for himself. Clarence Gideon was later proven guilty. He filed a habeas corpus petition that his denied attempt to an attorney was unlawful. The Florida Supreme Court denied his petition. Gideon sent his petition, in 1963, to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reviewed this case, also known as the Gideon vs. Wainwright case, and decided that under the 6th amendment, the defendant is allowed to receive counsel when the defendant is being tried for a serious crime. The Gideon

In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the case begins with Gideon arrest in 1961. Clarence Earl Gideon was a drifter who was in and out of prison for nonviolent crimes. On January 3, 1961, 51-year-old Gideon was charged with breaking and entering into a Bay Harbor Pool Room in Panama City, Florida with the intent to commit a misdemeanor, which is a felony under Florida law. Giedion was charged with a felony in the state of Florida. Gideon appeared in the Florida court and informed the judge that he would like to be appointed counsel because he could not afford one. The judge denied Gideon’s request to be appointed an attorney. The courts stated that under Florida law the only time an indigent defendant is entitled to be appointed counsel is when

The court case of Hodgson v Minnesota is over whether it is constitutional to require a minor to notify both parents at least 48 hours before receiving an abortion. The opposing view states that both parents should be notified and that it should be of the discretion pertaining to the minor if they are mature enough.