Name: J Milbs Issue Question: Can continuing to prosecute people like Darren Chiacchia for spreading the HIV virus be justified? 1. Premise One: If the Florida HIV laws are outdated, then continuing to prosecute people like Darren Chiacchia can no longer be justified. 1. If the Florida HIV laws are outdated, then the diagnosis of an HIV infection is no longer tantamount to a death sentence.
Obscene, in this sense, pertains only to the legal definition of obscenity, not what any particular person or moral code may deem obscene. Luke Records, Inc. was a Florida Corporation and Nick Navarro was the sheriff of Broward County at the time. The sheriff obtained an ex-parte injunction (this means an injunction without both parties being present at the initial hearing) granting the sheriff an injunction (a court order to "stop" doing a particular act). This injunction was served on local record stores in an effort to have the music removed from Florida retail sale. After the local Florida Circuit Court in Broward County issued the injunction, the decision was appealed to the United States District Court for Southern Florida where the Court ordered the sheriff to stop enforcing the injunction, but did, in fact, rule that the music was obscene, especially the song "As Nasty As They Wanna Be."
In the year 2013 the state of Florida passed a law indicating that texting and driving is now banned. Even though this law was passed, this law states that in order to get in trouble for this offense you must have to commit 2 offenses, which raised questions for civilians with how effective this law really is. Some residents feared that other residents (mostly referring to teenagers and other young and reckless drivers), will not be open minded to this law. In addition this may lead to some residents living in fear of others breaking the law, resulting in an accident, and having innocent people lose their lives over a simple text message that could have waited. The problem is some locals want to create a more improved exceeding, and stronger law, which is understanding but Florida is doing the best they can do at the moment to help prevent texting and driving.
Hudson was charged under Michigan law with unlawful drug and firearm possession. When police arrived to execute the warrant, they announced their presence, but waited only a short time perhaps “three to five seconds” before turning the knob of the unlocked front door and entering Hudson’s home. At trial Hudson argued that police violated the knock and announce requirement, therefore all the evidence stemming from the search warrant should be inadmissible. The Trial Judge granted the motion to suppress the evidence. On appeal, Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the motion to suppress.
Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.
Acts of armed robbery that end in violence or homicide tend to render the public outraged and give their voice a stronger demand for justice to be done. If we choose to take the stance that our criminal justice system is mean to only keep society safe and that justice is carried out then we need to recognize that the laws we have in place currently are set in place to do so. In theory we could see how enforcing a harsher sentence to those who choose to commit violent acts or armed robbery would work as a deterrent to prevent criminals from committing the act as often as they do
Right to Counsel Elsie M Farias CJA 364/ Criminal Procedure March 27, 2013 Professor Horwath Right to Counsel The Sixth Amendment of the United States constitution grants the right of a person accused of a crime the right to counsel to aid and represent themselves. This is known as the Right to Counsel. The Right to Counsel is founded on the Right to a fair trial. If a defendant is unable to retain their own counsel, they have the right to request one to be appointed to them. The defendant also has the right to not retain or request a lawyer and this turns their representation to Pro Sea which basically means one waives all their rights.
Evidence includes a knife covered with blood near the victim and the accused found covered in blood at the murder scene by the police. During the investigation, the police interview a witness claiming to have watched the stabbing occur. The witness makes a statement to the police claiming the stabbing was by another unknown person, not the accused. The witness's statement is exculpatory evidence, since it could introduce reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused. The police believe the witness's account is not true or the witness is unreliable and choose to not follow up on the lead.
Causing people to misuse and get charged with the outcomes of their actions. Discussion Stand your ground law is about balance and drawing the line in the sand by defining that an individual can allow the intruder to do this to them, but not this act (Gardner and Anderson). For instance, the case of Zachary Levin who confronted his mother’s boyfriend with baseball bats and was shot and killed raised the question
We often consider violence in terms of the aggressor, yet violence can be in a variety of ways even including self-defense. Violence and nonviolence are some argument Therefore, there is some questions that arise out of the argument of violence and nonviolence: “Is violence ever acceptable or nonviolence?” First of all, Comparing Violence and Nonviolence, nonviolence is less bloody. At first, no matter the situation, people never are violent in my opinion. I think of issues such as wars or if someone is trying to kill you or your family. How could someone not do anything?