The Commonwealth Of Virginia V. Allen

As technology advances, the world is forced to adapt as an increasingly quick pace. Specifically, our justice system must consider the constitutionality of surveillance and other information gathering techniques and how they coincide with current interpretations of the Fourth Amendment which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court addressed this issue in the 2013 case of Maryland v King explicitly related to the legality of DNA collection of individuals early in the booking process for serious crimes. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that pre-conviction DNA collection of those arrested for serious crimes is constitutional and does not violate the Fourth Amendment; a decision that will

In a quick observation, it may be easy to observe that the Constitution of Virginia is much larger in length and detail than the United States Constitution. There are many differences between these two constitutions besides the authors or contributors being that James Madison contributed to both, however, he was not the complete author of the Constitution of Virginia (Constitutions of Virginia). Both Constitutions have the same idea in which it holds three separate branches of government, however, differences include the detail and content brought amongst the articles. Differences include, but are not limited to, division of the three branches, extra articles and policies, and the amendments. They

The Virginia’s Statutes illustrate the declining Status of African American slaves was written because the state of Virginia wanted to state several rules and laws for their slaves. This document was written by the State of Virginia legislatures, being they were the ones who wrote it and established it. The main rule applied was that black people could not be with white people. Any white person married to a black or mulatto would be banished and will be known as a systematic plan formed to capture outlying slaves. Black men and women were known as slaves.

II. “Judge Pirtle should recuse himself from presiding in this case, because the State intends to call Judge Pirtle as a witness, concerning the qualifications and credibility of Dr. Ralph Erdmann, the pathologist who performed the autopsy in this capital murder case.” (http://www.goextranet.net/Seminars/Examples/Disqualify/State%27sRecuseJudge.htm)

In Israel on the Appomattox author Melvin Patrick Ely uses the case study of Prince Edward County, Virginia, to shift the historiography surrounding the treatment of free blacks in the Antebellum South. While the current historiography paints the Antebellum South as attempting to subjugate free blacks into a system “‘as near to slaver as possible’” (p. 437), Ely posits that because of the existence of black slavery “Southern whites felt secure enough to deal fairly and even respectfully with free African Americans” (p. x). And though Ely agrees that “laws and public statements about free blacks in the Old South constitute a sordid parade of mean-spiritedness” (p. 436), the actual behavior of white citizens of Prince Edward County rarely align with “the path their social ideology prescribed” (p. 440). In going against the previously well-established understanding of the relationship between free blacks and whites, Ely has placed upon himself the large onus of disproving so many who have come before him, and the approach he takes within Israel on the Appomattox is as fascinating as it is convincing.

The lawyer of a man who is being accused of murder contacted me. It was requested that I be the expert witness and decide if the man, Edward Gein, is mentally fit to stand trial.

The movie Loving is based off of the court case Loving v. Virginia. Even after the Civil Rights act of 1964 that outlawed discrimination based on race, origin, and religion, had not yet edified the question of marriage. States, such as Virginia, still imposed a ban on interracial marriages. The charges against the protagonists, Mildred and Richard Loving, spiked my interest because of the enhanced step taken by society as was taken in modern times during the same-sex marriage case Obergefell v. Hodges. The court during the twentieth century was forced to question our evolving standards of decency and define our Constitutional rights given to us by Equal Protection and Due Process laws of the fifth and fourteenth amendment.

Hapman, their conversations and any records generated by Hapman became privileged, meaning that he could be liable if he disclosed. The privilege statutes state that “There are certain admissions and communications excluded from evidence on grounds of public policy, including . . . Communications between psychiatrist and patient.” Ga. Code Ann. § 24-5-501(a)(5). This replaced an older one with the only change being the addition of the “from evidence” language. Ga. Code Ann., § 24-9-21 (replaced in 2011). This privilege applies even after the patient’s death. Cooksey v. Landry, 761 S.E.2d 61, 65 (Ga. 2014). There are exceptions to this privilege for extreme cases such as child abuse, where a psychiatrist must report the abuse per Ga. Code Ann. § 19-7-5, during court mandated examinations where a psychiatrist must give testimony on a patient’s ability to stand trial, or in involuntary commitment proceedings determining the need to commit the patient. Leggett v. State, 259 S.E.2d 476, 478 (Ga. 1979); Ga. Code Ann. §

Marriage, what a wonderful thought it is, just the thought of it brings joy to the minds of many. But can you imagine a time where marriage had to be fought for where it wasn’t just allowed. What a hard time the people of this time had to go through. For example, the emperor who band marriage or the 14 times people had to bring the case of marriage to the Supreme Court. Or maybe the loving v. Virginia case. All of these are re4asons why marriage should be appreciated more today here’s why.

Psychologist competency evaluation are given to who are facing charges. The defendant who are evaluated on whether or not they are able to capable of standing trial. As everyone has the right to a fair trial, there must be a basis of competence for the process to proceed within the criminal justice process. In the case of a pretrial competence hearing, psychologist role is to assess the defendant on whether or not they have an understanding of the situation and consequences. “Assessments of competency to stand trial concentrate on several issues including mental and physical health, comprehension of legal proceedings, and capacity to communicate with legal counsel,” (Chauhan, Warren, Kois & Wellbeloved-Stone, 2015, p.50). Competence to stand

Another week, and another tough debate that places our government in the crosshairs. There is a separation of church and state, and In my opinion, there should also be a separation of state and marriage. Head (2016) wrote, government regardless of its level should not have interests in the legislation of relationship between anybody...citing that unless the state is sacramental (which it is not), or interested in propagation of children (unless unlikely), it has no business in the marriage arena (N.p.). You would think it would have been that simple, but before Loving v. Virginia 1967, many states and local governments had a say in who could, and could not be married based on race-citing biblical scripture as the reason. According to (Robinson,

In the year 1967 the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a mixed race couple in Virginia.

If the opinion does not support or have anything to do with the lawyer’s case, the expert will not be asked to testify, and the opinion will not be shown in court. Forensic psychiatrists charge an hourly fee for work with attorneys or courts. What do forensic psychiatrist do every day? They see patients, look at medical records, review patients for the courts. They also read over clinical education, then write papers about that. They also teach forensic topics in medical schools. Another thing they do is testify in

Court standards, rules, and regulations should be the same across the United States. This is a question that can easily be answered, or at least it should be easy to answer. In order to find what the basis and function of an expert witness are, it is imperative to check the standards of each state. The legal system has created the expert witness role. However, the “Rules of Evidence” which consist of consulting and testimonial evidence would not exist without the restatement of Federal Rules 701 through 706. This federal rule states that a qualified expert witness may give his/her expert opinion to help the courts understand some of the evidence, or to recognized a fact in issue.

Dr. Simpson is a psychiatrist who is actively engaging with a romantic relationship with a former patient, Ms. Groenig. Ms. Groenig was a victim of a severe domestic violence case, which left her with “severe anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and disturbed thinking” (Nelson, 2014). At the end of their therapy sessions, Dr. Simpson and Ms. Groenig consented to a romantic relationship.