However, there is currently no power for the prosecution to apply to overturn a verdict of acquittal entered at trial. Some of the main instances where the prosecution can seek an appeal or a reviewed. (p. 11) Even though we are being protected under the Fifth Amendment by the United States constitution, it may not give justice to those individuals. After doing this research on double jeopardy, I found that double jeopardy was established by the United States constitutional it come from Fifth Amendment. It protects individual against a second prosecution for the same crime, it also protects us multiple punishments by same crime.
An example is when the Miranda Doctrine is not observed upon arresting, the right of self-incrimination may be invoked so as for the evidences against the defense be inadmissible. In order for the Miranda Doctrine to be validly executed, such must be stated in the presence of the counsel for the defense. Such doctrine may be waived, but must be made with utmost knowledge of its consequences (Israel et al, 1993). Although both Fifth and Sixth Amendments embody significant rights for the citizens, it still has differences, one of which is that pertaining to the inquiries pertaining to the case is not allowed in the Fifth Amendment. The Sixth amendment protects the accused upon the case against him.
Dontae caine Lgs 3:30-4:45 4/6/2013 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISSON GROUNDS THAT THE STOLEN VALOR ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL To: Law partner to the current state of the law From: Dontae Reshard Caine Re: Stolen Valor Act as Unconstitutional Issue: Does the First Amendment protects false statements of fact – made without any apparent intent to defraud or gain anything? If so, what level of protection do they deserve. Six Justices agreed that some protection was warranted, but disagreed as to the amount, and three Justices believe that the First Amendment does not protect such lies at all. Background: The defendant has been charged by criminal complaint with one count of violation of 18U.S.C. § 704, popularly known as the Stolen Valor Act of 2005.
In Clayman vs Obama, Judge Richard echoed that surveillance and collection of telephony data by NSA without the knowledge of the general public was against the spirit of the constitution of America. He said that the right to privacy is a right that needs to be guaranteed by the state. The right should not be taken away from the persons by the state. In another ruling ten days after the first one, J. William in ACLU vs Clapper arrived at a diametrically opposite decision with a different reasoning. The judge appreciated the right to privacy as envisioned under the constitution but argued that the value of intelligence outweighed the right.
Hodges is a perfect example of a case of judicial activism. It is a case of judicial activism because the decision to allow same-sex marriage nationwide had almost nothing to do with the Constitution itself. How is one supposed to directly use the Constitution, the way strict constructionism would, if the Constitution does not directly answer the question being asked - What is marriage? Because of the fact that there is no “strict” constitutional outline when it comes to a case such as Obergfell v. Hodges majority seemed to replace opinions with their own personal thoughts on the matter at hand. They were able to look beyond the words of the Constitution ( they used judicial activism) in order to be able to better consider all of the possible outcomes that may take place by ruling positively in a case such as
To allow human beings to be human, meaning the capability of humans to choose what they do and do not do and strive for whatever personal endeavors they aspire for, necessitates that the fundamental liberties be protected and held equal. These liberties are not to be influenced, changed, or tinkered with by economical, financial, or any other circumstances; all persons are entitled to these liberties regardless of status or wealth. Although the first principle is priority over the second principle and other potential conflicts, it does however still have its limits. Certain liberties not listed above, such as freedom of contract, are not protected or granted by the first principle since they are not basic liberties. The second principle of justice declares, “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and (b)
Some other documents asserting individual rights include 1689 the English Bill of Rights, 1789 the French Declaration on the Rights of Man and Citizen and 1791 the US Constitution and Bill of Rights that all are written precursors to today’s human rights documents. The main reason of this given declaration is to promote a serious respect to a person’s rights and freedom, and to have a universal guaranty that would help in the process of controlling of the recognition of them. This declaration became a
Politics essay Essay question – A) Outline the concepts of negative and positive freedom. B) What is their relevance for the concept of democracy? The word freedom implies that an individual is free to act as she/ he desires. Freedom implies that there are thus no boundaries to limit any human actions. Freedom is a topic which is strongly debated on and is entwined with the ideas of liberalism and other ideologies (Anderson, 2012, What is Liberty, para.1).Freedom can be divided into two sub- sections known as negative freedom and positive freedom (Heywood, 2007; 324).
What I believe that the definition of independence is the absolute freedom to do what you want, and to not be held back by any rules or laws of government or man, but by the rules and laws of nature and your own conscious. My view of independence may greatly differ form your beliefs on the definition but in this paper I will try to show exactly what my perspective on the definition of independence is by my experiences, my beliefs, my thoughts, and research on the subject at hand. Firstly, I believe that independence can not be the definition of what your government says is independent. If you go by what the government says is independent than why not go by Chinas definition of independence, or by the communists party’s definition of independence. If you are being governed than you are not truly independent.
For example, in juvenile court, attorneys are not required or appointed. Additionally juvenile court does not guarantee trial by jury, although many states do allow jury tries for juvenile cases. Critics of the juvenile court system, like Supreme Court Justice Douglas, who wrote the dissenting opinion for the landmark US Supreme Court case of McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, feel that denying juveniles these constitutional protections represent an “invidious discrimination… to be denied these same constitutional safeguards” as adults (McKeiver v. Pennsylvania). While juvenile courts do not guarantee the same legal rights as adult courts, the preclusion of these rights is actually to the benefit of the offender. While a jury may see certain mannerisms or behaviors of a juvenile offender on trial as signs of guilt, juvenile court judges are better able to understand the normal behavior of juvenile offenders on trial.