The O Grady Case Brief

Case 3: “Henry Gifford, et al. v. United States Green Building Council (USGBC), et al., 10‐7747 (filed October 8, 2010)”.

The prosecution reduced the charge from murder to manslaughter as they did not believe the requisite degree of reckless indifference or lack of mens rea were sufficient evidence to support the charge of murder. The use of discretion is outlined in the

What alternatives are available to Brent in regards to the audit of payables? What are the pros and cons of each alternative?

In 1976, the United States Supreme Court, in Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976), and Proffitt v. Florida, 428 U.S. 242 (1976) held that the discretion to impose the death sentence for specific crimes was to be bi-furcated into two separate trials. The first to determine guilt or innocence; the second to determine the aggravating and mitigating factors. The State of Oceana adopted the findings of the U.S. Supreme Court in People v. Wende, 600 P. 2d 1071 (Cal: Supreme Court 1979) In

In the city of San Francisco, California, of 1880, there was an ordinance passed; stating that all laundry businesses are required to be in brick buildings, not in wooden ones. Seemingly, it seems that the dictum was established because of the possible chances of fire hazards with wooden buildings. There were 240 laundry businesses out of commission, while 69 other laundry businesses, wooden ones, were able to stay afloat. Now, what’s the difference between the two? The major difference is that the 240 owners (that were arrested) were Chineses and the the 69 owners (the ones that should’ve been charged as well) were white. This led to the court case, Yick Wo V. Hopkins,when Yick Wo was arrested because of he voiced his opinions, petitioning

Jones, “the Government’s installation of a GPS device on a target’s vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a ‘search.’” They stressed the importance of fact that the Government had “physically occupied private property for the purpose of obtaining information.” Under these circumstances, it was not necessary to inquire about the defendant’s expectation of privacy in his vehicle’s movements in order to determine if a Fourth Amendment search had occurred. They continued to reaffirmed this principle in Florida v. Jardines, where they held that having a drug-sniffing dog nose around a suspect’s front porch was a search, because police physically entered the enclosure of the home and gathered information without being permitted by the

According to court records, thirteen years ago, Carlos Bermudez, lost his wife in a terrible head-on accident when an intoxicated Miccosukee tribal member crossed the centerline of the Tamiami Trail and crashed directly into their

The sixth and fourteenth amendment both protect rights having to do with due process and right to counsel.

BATH, N.Y. (WENY) -- The man accused of killing his wife in their Caton home back in September appeared in court Tuesday. Thomas Clayton was in Steuben County Court for a motion hearing, where attorneys from both sides of the case exchanged information in the death of Kelley Stage Clayton.

The central issue in the mock trial was whether the payment of life insurance from Prime Global Insurance group to Raven Temple, the wife of the late Aubrey Temple, was warranted. Aubrey Temple purchased a life insurance plan from Prime Global Insurance on March 16th, 2011. Prime Global Insurance’s policy is illustrated clearly in their terms and conditions that the one-million dollar payout to the policy holder’s beneficiary on the condition that the death of the individual must not have occurred by suicide within two years of enacting the contract. My contribution to jury deliberations were to synthesize the evidence to most accurately depict the events that passed, and to come to a conclusion whether Mr. Temple died by suicide or accidental death, and if his death occurred before the two-year time period as outlined in the insurance company’s policy. The prosecution and defense painted a story for the jury and called on witnesses including Ms. Temple ¬– the wife of the late Mr. Temple, Mr. Usher – former business partner of Mr. Temple, the transcript of a sworn testimony by the medical examiner of Mr. Temple, a detective who arrived at the scene, the limo driver who was driving Mr. Temple from that night’s Veteran Ball, and an individual who was driving behind the limo before Mr. Temple was ejected out of the vehicle.

While at the hospital, surgery is performed; however, the victim dies on the operating table. It is later discovered the hospital staff gave the patient medication during the procedure in which the victim was allergic to, but was not the cause of death. The cause of death was determined to be the severed artery and loss of blood. Even though the injuries were life threatening and the victim died anyway, the defendant could argue the hospital staff was the proximate cause of the victim’s death by giving them the medication they are allergic to. This should not release the defendant from a murder charge since the victim died from injuries they sustained from the stabbing. With the artery being severed, there was no hope for the victim. The medication given to the patient, while negligent in the dose administration, did not cause the death of the

Case Facts: This is two different cases with two different defendants’ committing two separated murders. Victor (defendant) was sentenced murder in the state of Nebraska (offended party). Sandoval was sentenced murder in the state of California. Both respondents requested their appeals on grounds that the trial court's jury directions passed on a disgraceful meaning of the sensible uncertainty standard and abused the defendants' expected procedure rights. The United States Supreme Court solidified the two cases for survey.

Facts: The victim was trying to steal some windshield wipers off the Defendant’s junked car. Words was exchanged back for and then the defendant went back into the house to get a lethal weapon. The Defendant threatened the victim multiple times to get away from his car. The Defendant then shot the victim because he was carrying a wrench when he steps out of his car.

The Defendent was then charged with murder. At trial, the trial judge directed an acquital on the grounds that no conviction for either murder or manslaughter was possible in law. The attorney generals reference was subsequently filed which challenged the decision

The other fact is that the two $1,000 checks returned unpaid when Century West submitted them to the bank on November 9, 2012. Century West had already asked the payment to Nichols, but only got $500. In March 2013 Century West filed a small-claims lawsuit against Nichols pursued the remaining $1,500 and finally, it was paid.