Sunday, December 13, 2009
Fiction Blog 5
Ellie found information that may incriminate Rob Westerfield of another murder that occurred before the death of Andrea, Ellie's sister. A locket with the initials A. R. for Amy Rayburn belonged to murder victim. The locket was found in the possession of Rob Westerfield. One of Rob's cellmates remembers him talking about beating A. R. to death and it feeling good. This inmate could be used to prove that Rob confessed to the murder of another girl. The locket could be used as evidence against Rob Westerfield. Beating the girl to death is the mens rea portion of the criminal elements. He willing beat the girl to death. There is also the acutus reus portion. If he had not intended to kill the girl he would have stopped beating her. A woman called Ellie to tell her that she has proof that Rob disguised his identity by wearing a wig. This also proves the intent of Rob to murder his victims without getting caught. It turned out that it was Rob Westerfield playing a woman to lure Ellie out. She recognized Rob when she went to go meet the woman. Ellie tried to get away in her car but Rob followed her in his van. Rob pushed Ellie car into some trees. Ellie was amazingly unhurt by the car crash. Rob took a tire iron and tried to bludgeon Ellie to death in her car. At that point a police car came rushing on the scene with its light and sirens blaring. The police car saw the predicament that Ellie was in and did the only thing it supposedly could to save her. The car rammed Rob out of the way. Rob got two broken legs. Police officers are allowed to use deadly force to protect themselves or others from use of deadly physical force. This is an example of that permission. Laws In the end Rob Westerfield was convicted of the murder of a second person and the attempted murder of Ellie Cavanaugh. He got consecutive sentences and will not get out of jaill for113 years. I say that this outcome pleases me even though it is a fiction book. It seems that the attorney for Rob Westerfield bribed Will Nebels, the man who claimed to have seen another man go into the garage, to make the story. The attorney is now a disbarred attorney who is serving his own sentence for that little fiasco. ABA rules
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Law Experience Blog
I found the time to do my court experience over the Thanksgiving weekend. I looked online to find the court times for both the federal and state courts. The state courts looked really hurried . The schedule for the state court looked like a case was given only five minutes before the next case came up. I decided that that was not conducive to my learning experience since I would not know what was going on before the next case came up. I then looked at the federal court schedules. They looked like they were longer and actually had something interesting going on. I printed out the docket entry order for the case I was going to see.
I a little trouble finding the U.S. District Courthouse on Fort Street. A guard met me at the entrance to the parking lot. He asked me what my business was and if I had identification on me. I showed him my ID and told him that I came to see a case. The guard told me to ask the people inside for information on where the case would be taking place. Inside the building I had to go through security just like at the airports. The guards inside X-rayed my purse and I went through a metal detector. It was surprising at first the security measures that were the apparent standard. My mom enlightened me to the reasons for the strict security. Apparently a few disgruntled parties have felt that justice had not been served to their satisfaction and decided to take matters into their own hands. The results were disastrous and a few people were injured. I know see that the tight security is reasonable and preventative.
I was a few minutes early to the courtroom where the case was to be in. There were a few people outside the courtroom talking to each other. They asked me my purpose and I told them that I came to observe the law in action. They informed me that the case I had decided to see wouldn't be very interesting since the case would be moved into the council chambers where the public was not allowed to watch. The people told me of the bankruptcy courtroom downstairs. I went to that courtroom instead.
Upon entering the courtroom I found that I was the worst dressed person in the room. Everyone else was in suits or business attire. I was wearing jeans and a Old Navy sweater. When the judge entered the room, a secretary of some sort called out "All rise for Honorable Terry L. Meyers!" It was only when the judge sat that everyone else sat down. It was a little intimidating and I guess it is an example of charismatic authority though not for the Supreme Court. There was no jury.
The first case to be heard was between the Internal Revenue Service and a construction company. It was an emergency motion to move back the date of the next hearing. The defendant was ill and could not be there but knew of what was going on. The company had their payroll taxes in a lump sum and did not have specific details that the IRS wanted. There was also a representative from Wells Fargo there who said that the bank did not have any objections to the motion. The judge granted the motion right then and there.
The second case was quite a bit longer than the first which probably took ten minutes. It was apparent to me that this was not the first time the judge had seen this case before and the basic details had already been gone over. This time they were just going over every excruciating detail. It was confusing since I hadn't read the affidavits that the defense and prosecutors had submitted to the judge. The judge had problems with the affidavits submitted. He did not like that the case was because he wanted specific details not summarizations of the case. I liked the judge from the beginning because of the language he used. He stated, "I know both sides have had some trippage at the beginning." The defense said they had not known that a new law that had been introduced. The judge said he would not award fines for the mistakes.
The defense lawyer looked real young and showed his inexperience with his choice of words. He specifically said "You can basically kinda conceive that the defendant was insolvent at the time of payment." The judge called him on that statement. "It is either is or it isn't. There is no basically kinda." I liked this comment a lot.
Before the case began a guard came in and closed the doors. He wasn't young and looked quite old. He had an earpiece in as well. He was replaced by another guard who was about the same age as the first. I would think that if a confrontation started a stronger, younger man would be needed to stop the fighting not a man who looks like he should be in retirement.
It was really boring and confusing. I did not know what the problem was and there was no one to ask without being rude. I recognized a few words that sounded like they were legal terms. "Reasonable equivalent value," "indirect v. direct benefit," and "but for __ actions no harm would have been done." I think the case was talking about whether someone got paid for their services and if it was enough. There was also a complication of the significant passage of time. Apparently the plaintiff got paid by a different person than the person who owed him. I also noticed the prosecution went first, then the defense but there wasn't any cross examination of witnesses. I think I heard it called a summary judgment hearing. I don't know what that is. In the end I think I could done without the boredom, the cold, and the cold. I don't think I will go to court again unless it is something really interesting that deals with civil rights.
I a little trouble finding the U.S. District Courthouse on Fort Street. A guard met me at the entrance to the parking lot. He asked me what my business was and if I had identification on me. I showed him my ID and told him that I came to see a case. The guard told me to ask the people inside for information on where the case would be taking place. Inside the building I had to go through security just like at the airports. The guards inside X-rayed my purse and I went through a metal detector. It was surprising at first the security measures that were the apparent standard. My mom enlightened me to the reasons for the strict security. Apparently a few disgruntled parties have felt that justice had not been served to their satisfaction and decided to take matters into their own hands. The results were disastrous and a few people were injured. I know see that the tight security is reasonable and preventative.
I was a few minutes early to the courtroom where the case was to be in. There were a few people outside the courtroom talking to each other. They asked me my purpose and I told them that I came to observe the law in action. They informed me that the case I had decided to see wouldn't be very interesting since the case would be moved into the council chambers where the public was not allowed to watch. The people told me of the bankruptcy courtroom downstairs. I went to that courtroom instead.
Upon entering the courtroom I found that I was the worst dressed person in the room. Everyone else was in suits or business attire. I was wearing jeans and a Old Navy sweater. When the judge entered the room, a secretary of some sort called out "All rise for Honorable Terry L. Meyers!" It was only when the judge sat that everyone else sat down. It was a little intimidating and I guess it is an example of charismatic authority though not for the Supreme Court. There was no jury.
The first case to be heard was between the Internal Revenue Service and a construction company. It was an emergency motion to move back the date of the next hearing. The defendant was ill and could not be there but knew of what was going on. The company had their payroll taxes in a lump sum and did not have specific details that the IRS wanted. There was also a representative from Wells Fargo there who said that the bank did not have any objections to the motion. The judge granted the motion right then and there.
The second case was quite a bit longer than the first which probably took ten minutes. It was apparent to me that this was not the first time the judge had seen this case before and the basic details had already been gone over. This time they were just going over every excruciating detail. It was confusing since I hadn't read the affidavits that the defense and prosecutors had submitted to the judge. The judge had problems with the affidavits submitted. He did not like that the case was because he wanted specific details not summarizations of the case. I liked the judge from the beginning because of the language he used. He stated, "I know both sides have had some trippage at the beginning." The defense said they had not known that a new law that had been introduced. The judge said he would not award fines for the mistakes.
The defense lawyer looked real young and showed his inexperience with his choice of words. He specifically said "You can basically kinda conceive that the defendant was insolvent at the time of payment." The judge called him on that statement. "It is either is or it isn't. There is no basically kinda." I liked this comment a lot.
Before the case began a guard came in and closed the doors. He wasn't young and looked quite old. He had an earpiece in as well. He was replaced by another guard who was about the same age as the first. I would think that if a confrontation started a stronger, younger man would be needed to stop the fighting not a man who looks like he should be in retirement.
It was really boring and confusing. I did not know what the problem was and there was no one to ask without being rude. I recognized a few words that sounded like they were legal terms. "Reasonable equivalent value," "indirect v. direct benefit," and "but for __ actions no harm would have been done." I think the case was talking about whether someone got paid for their services and if it was enough. There was also a complication of the significant passage of time. Apparently the plaintiff got paid by a different person than the person who owed him. I also noticed the prosecution went first, then the defense but there wasn't any cross examination of witnesses. I think I heard it called a summary judgment hearing. I don't know what that is. In the end I think I could done without the boredom, the cold, and the cold. I don't think I will go to court again unless it is something really interesting that deals with civil rights.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Ch. 13 Comparative Law: Law in Other Cultures
There was a system of law in preliterate bands and tribes even though it was not formalized through writing. Bands usually have fifty to a hundred people and mostly use hunting and gathering as their source of food. Tribes have several hundred people and a tribal council. They augment their hunting and gathering with some agriculture. Clans are subunits of tribes. Both bands and tribes use self-redress as their method of law. I do not know why I find it funny that those people who are found to be a detriment to the Inuits would be pushed off the ice to drown when no one is looking. It just seems like the perfect karma situation that is ironic. http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/alaska/eskimo.html
There are four families of law and they include common law, civil law, socialist law, and islamic law. Common law's basic features are that it is unwritten, it respects precedent, it is adversarial, it uses grand and petit juries, and it uses judicial review. It originated in England during the Norman conquest in 1066 C.E.. It follows the rule of law which is the principle that law, not men, govern and that no one is above the law. The only system of law that does not follow the rule of law is socialist law. It believes that the needs of the state are above the rule of law. This leads to corruption. Absolute power corrupts absolutely in my book.
Civil law has its historical origins in ancient Rome and nineteenth century France and Germany. The author mainly focuses on France's version of civil law so there is no comparison to other systems. Civil law is written, does not officially recognize precedent, is inquisitorial, does not use juries much, and uses judicial review sparingly. In civil law you are guilty until proven innocent. As an American this does not seem fair to me. There is no predictability to this law system without precedent. I think judicial review should be everywhere because it limits the power of the state and creates a balance.
Socialist law originated with Karl Marx's principles in the Russian Revolution. With the creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Marx's principles became the foundation for a country. It is now practiced in China, North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba. We had several encounters with socialist states such as these because of the differences between the two systems of law and economies. Socialist law is not judge-made law and is codified by an authority not by tradition. In the end the system of law is seen as a temporary anachronism devoted to its own demise. I find this statement to be ironically funny because the Soviet Union dissolved and lived up to its own demise as prophesied by Marx.
Islamic law is the harshest I have seen. Its basic feat
ures consist of it being god-made law written down in the Koran and the Sunna. It is a hybrid of the inquisitorial and adversarial systems. Islamic believes that law oversees all behavior. This system has purely individualized justice and judicial review is limited to certain crimes only. Islamic law originated the Middle Eastern countries and has spread to Northern Africa, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The punishments for Hadd crimes are quite severe and have mandated punishments as defined by God in the Koran. Hadd crimes include adultery (death), fornication (80 lashes), false accussatioin of fornication and adultery (100 lashes), alcohol consumption (whipping, death possible on third offense), apostasy (death), theft (amputation of hand), robbery (amputation of hand and alternate foot). Those punishments are quite severe to me.
There are four families of law and they include common law, civil law, socialist law, and islamic law. Common law's basic features are that it is unwritten, it respects precedent, it is adversarial, it uses grand and petit juries, and it uses judicial review. It originated in England during the Norman conquest in 1066 C.E.. It follows the rule of law which is the principle that law, not men, govern and that no one is above the law. The only system of law that does not follow the rule of law is socialist law. It believes that the needs of the state are above the rule of law. This leads to corruption. Absolute power corrupts absolutely in my book.
Civil law has its historical origins in ancient Rome and nineteenth century France and Germany. The author mainly focuses on France's version of civil law so there is no comparison to other systems. Civil law is written, does not officially recognize precedent, is inquisitorial, does not use juries much, and uses judicial review sparingly. In civil law you are guilty until proven innocent. As an American this does not seem fair to me. There is no predictability to this law system without precedent. I think judicial review should be everywhere because it limits the power of the state and creates a balance.
Socialist law originated with Karl Marx's principles in the Russian Revolution. With the creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Marx's principles became the foundation for a country. It is now practiced in China, North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba. We had several encounters with socialist states such as these because of the differences between the two systems of law and economies. Socialist law is not judge-made law and is codified by an authority not by tradition. In the end the system of law is seen as a temporary anachronism devoted to its own demise. I find this statement to be ironically funny because the Soviet Union dissolved and lived up to its own demise as prophesied by Marx.
Islamic law is the harshest I have seen. Its basic feat
ures consist of it being god-made law written down in the Koran and the Sunna. It is a hybrid of the inquisitorial and adversarial systems. Islamic believes that law oversees all behavior. This system has purely individualized justice and judicial review is limited to certain crimes only. Islamic law originated the Middle Eastern countries and has spread to Northern Africa, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The punishments for Hadd crimes are quite severe and have mandated punishments as defined by God in the Koran. Hadd crimes include adultery (death), fornication (80 lashes), false accussatioin of fornication and adultery (100 lashes), alcohol consumption (whipping, death possible on third offense), apostasy (death), theft (amputation of hand), robbery (amputation of hand and alternate foot). Those punishments are quite severe to me.
Ch. 13 Vocabulary
Song Duel: method of restoring peace among the Eskimo (Inuit) peoples by the perpetrator of a crime and the victim hurling singsong insults at one another.
Corpus Juris Civilis: Roman legal code also known as the Code of Justinian
Code Civil des Francais: also known as the Napoleonic Code. Became the blueprint for all subsequent civil law codes
Inquisitorial System: investigatory criminal justice system characterized by cooperation between all parties in an effort to reach the truth
Conseil Constitutionnel: France's constitutional court determining constitutionality of proposed legislation only.
Cour de Cassation: France's highest appeals court hearing criminal cases
Crimes: major offenses for which the penalty can be from five years to life imprisonment
Assize court: French court in which the most serious crimes are tried
Delicts: in the French criminal justice system, delicts are similar to the less serious felonies in the American system. They carry a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison and are tried in correctional court
Police court: lowest-level French trial court for crimes with maximum penalty of two months in jail
Socialist law: system of law based on Marxist principles and developed in the former Soviet Union. Socialist law subordinates the rule of law to the requirements of the state
Ch'ing Code: early (1646) Chinese law code containing many statutes and offenses
Principle of Analogy: Chinese legal principle allowing for punishment of acts not specified by criminal codes but which are "analogous" to them
People's Mediation Committees: community of individuals organized in work and neighborhood groups to ensure rule conformity
Collegial Bench: compromises one to three professional judges and two to four lay people's assessors who sit in judgment of Chinese individuals accused of serious crimes
Supreme People's Court: China's highest-level court. Deals with important national matters and appeals from lower courts
Higher People's Court: Chinese court analogous to an American state supreme court
Intermediate People's Court: Chinese court that carries out the same functions as the higher people's court at the prefecture (multicounty) level. The major difference is that it is a court of original jurisdiction for cases involving serious crimes such as murder and rape
Basic People's Court: Chinese court analogous to American district (felony) court
Islamic Law: a theocratic system of law based on the Qur'an, the Sunna, and Shari'a
Sunna: companion book to the Qur'an containing numerous moral precepts relating to all aspects of Islamic life
Qadi: (Khadi) islamic judge
Hadd Crimes: (plural, Huddud) Islam' most serious crimes with mandated punishments as defined by God
Quesas: in Islamic law, serious non-Hadd crimes for which punishment is not prescribed in the Qur'an, Islam's holy book
Ta'azir Crimes: in Islamic law, minor crimes for which punishment is discretionary and lenient by Islamic standards
Musta'galah: type of court in Islamic law that hears minor (ta'azir) offenses
Kubra: the high court in Islamic law that hear serious (Hadd) offenses
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen: revolutionary document integrated into the French Constitution
International Court of Justice: also known as the World Court, it is the judicial body of the United Nations. Deals with legal disputes among United Nations member states
Corpus Juris Civilis: Roman legal code also known as the Code of Justinian
Code Civil des Francais: also known as the Napoleonic Code. Became the blueprint for all subsequent civil law codes
Inquisitorial System: investigatory criminal justice system characterized by cooperation between all parties in an effort to reach the truth
Conseil Constitutionnel: France's constitutional court determining constitutionality of proposed legislation only.
Cour de Cassation: France's highest appeals court hearing criminal cases
Crimes: major offenses for which the penalty can be from five years to life imprisonment
Assize court: French court in which the most serious crimes are tried
Delicts: in the French criminal justice system, delicts are similar to the less serious felonies in the American system. They carry a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison and are tried in correctional court
Police court: lowest-level French trial court for crimes with maximum penalty of two months in jail
Socialist law: system of law based on Marxist principles and developed in the former Soviet Union. Socialist law subordinates the rule of law to the requirements of the state
Ch'ing Code: early (1646) Chinese law code containing many statutes and offenses
Principle of Analogy: Chinese legal principle allowing for punishment of acts not specified by criminal codes but which are "analogous" to them
People's Mediation Committees: community of individuals organized in work and neighborhood groups to ensure rule conformity
Collegial Bench: compromises one to three professional judges and two to four lay people's assessors who sit in judgment of Chinese individuals accused of serious crimes
Supreme People's Court: China's highest-level court. Deals with important national matters and appeals from lower courts
Higher People's Court: Chinese court analogous to an American state supreme court
Intermediate People's Court: Chinese court that carries out the same functions as the higher people's court at the prefecture (multicounty) level. The major difference is that it is a court of original jurisdiction for cases involving serious crimes such as murder and rape
Basic People's Court: Chinese court analogous to American district (felony) court
Islamic Law: a theocratic system of law based on the Qur'an, the Sunna, and Shari'a
Sunna: companion book to the Qur'an containing numerous moral precepts relating to all aspects of Islamic life
Qadi: (Khadi) islamic judge
Hadd Crimes: (plural, Huddud) Islam' most serious crimes with mandated punishments as defined by God
Quesas: in Islamic law, serious non-Hadd crimes for which punishment is not prescribed in the Qur'an, Islam's holy book
Ta'azir Crimes: in Islamic law, minor crimes for which punishment is discretionary and lenient by Islamic standards
Musta'galah: type of court in Islamic law that hears minor (ta'azir) offenses
Kubra: the high court in Islamic law that hear serious (Hadd) offenses
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen: revolutionary document integrated into the French Constitution
International Court of Justice: also known as the World Court, it is the judicial body of the United Nations. Deals with legal disputes among United Nations member states
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Ch. 12 Racial Minorities and the Law
"For the law to be legitimate it must enjoy the united and consenting will of all [not just the majority]"--Immanuel Kant
This chapter mostly talks about the injustices done to African Americans, Native Americans, and those peoples of Asian decent. It does not talk about the the hardships that Irish and other white peoples had to endure. When the Irish immigrated to the United State they were looking for a place that was free of prejudices and a chance to become successful. Although it was not as bad as that of the Native Americans or African Americans it was still there. A few came for the American dream and other came because of the potato famine in Ireland. The American dream is the idea that anyone of any rank can achieve a better, richer, and happier life through hard work and dedication. Usually the Irish worked at the most menial jobs but then worked their way up through the social strata. Sometimes they were discriminated against because of their Catholic religion and other times for their bad living conditions upon first entering the United States. Between 1820 and 1860 about a third of the work force of the United States was Irish. Now most everyone I know has some Irish blood in them. Persecution
My dad owns a piece of land in Banks, Idaho. Banks is right next to the Payette River. The land is about 800 acres. It is a homestead. It used to be called Indian Ranch but is now called Dry Buck Ranch. My father told me that a long time ago a tribe of Native Americans used to live there. He said that they were called the Sheepeater Indians. He also said that they hid out there when the white men were trying to hunt them down. Every once and a while you'll find arrowheads that indicate that what he is telling is true. My mother raised a question. If the government decides to give the Native Americans back some of their ancestral lands would that property be considered part of that exchange. I guess it could be and that we would lose the property. This has made me think.
I find it horrible that all these horrible things happened to the Indians and the slaves. My ancestors may even have played a part in events described in the book. It makes me angry and a little sad that it happened. I have to remind myself that I personally had nothing to do with those ghastly events.
This chapter mostly talks about the injustices done to African Americans, Native Americans, and those peoples of Asian decent. It does not talk about the the hardships that Irish and other white peoples had to endure. When the Irish immigrated to the United State they were looking for a place that was free of prejudices and a chance to become successful. Although it was not as bad as that of the Native Americans or African Americans it was still there. A few came for the American dream and other came because of the potato famine in Ireland. The American dream is the idea that anyone of any rank can achieve a better, richer, and happier life through hard work and dedication. Usually the Irish worked at the most menial jobs but then worked their way up through the social strata. Sometimes they were discriminated against because of their Catholic religion and other times for their bad living conditions upon first entering the United States. Between 1820 and 1860 about a third of the work force of the United States was Irish. Now most everyone I know has some Irish blood in them. Persecution
My dad owns a piece of land in Banks, Idaho. Banks is right next to the Payette River. The land is about 800 acres. It is a homestead. It used to be called Indian Ranch but is now called Dry Buck Ranch. My father told me that a long time ago a tribe of Native Americans used to live there. He said that they were called the Sheepeater Indians. He also said that they hid out there when the white men were trying to hunt them down. Every once and a while you'll find arrowheads that indicate that what he is telling is true. My mother raised a question. If the government decides to give the Native Americans back some of their ancestral lands would that property be considered part of that exchange. I guess it could be and that we would lose the property. This has made me think.
I find it horrible that all these horrible things happened to the Indians and the slaves. My ancestors may even have played a part in events described in the book. It makes me angry and a little sad that it happened. I have to remind myself that I personally had nothing to do with those ghastly events.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Ch. 12 Vocabulary
Missouri Compromise: an act admitting Missouri into the union as a slave state but restricting the spread of slavery in certain other areas of the Louisiana Purchase territories (1820)
Kansas-Nebraska Act: repealed the Missouri Compromise and opened up areas of the West to slavery (1854)
Emancipation Proclamation: executive proclamation issued in 1862 and in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln, freeing all slaves in the United States
Reconstruction: a period of reestablishment and reorganization of the of the seceded southern states after their defeat in the Civil War
Freedman's Bureau: during the reconstruction, Bureau set up by the federal government to provide former slaves with food, clothing, schools, and other requirements. Sometimes land from confiscated or abandoned land
Black Codes: various legal codes enacted by the Southern states to control, restrict, and inhibit the movements and behavior of ex-slaves
Jim Crow Laws: any state or federal laws that enforced the segregation of the races in various areas of American life
Racism: a belief in the innate inferiority of persons of another race and discriminatory behavior consistent with that belief
NAACP: National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, founded in 1910 by W. E. B. DuBois to advance the causes of African Americans
Civil Rights Act of 1964: sweeping Congressional act that ensured civil, political, and social rights for blacks
Voting Rights Act of 1965: act providing federal supervision of voter registration sites and prohibiting the use of literary tests
Cold War: period from the end of World War II to 1989. A propaganda war "fought" largely between the United States and the Soviet Union
Northwest Ordinance: provided for a survey of the Northwest Territories and gave the U.S. Congress rather than the states the sole right to trade with Indians
Treaty of Fort Pit: first treaty made with the Indians. It implicitly recognized the sovereignty of the Indian nations and assured them that the United States had no designs on Indian lands
Marshall Trilogy: three Supreme Court cases that defined the legal status of Native American sovereignty
Discovery Doctrine: Justice Marshall's doctrine asserting white sovereignty over the Indians by virtue of being heir to the European power that "discovered" America
Indian Removal Act: Congressional act mandating the removal of all Indians in the Southeastern states to "Indian territory" (now the state of Oklahoma)
Assimilation Period: period in which the U.S. government attempted to integrate the Indians into white society by "civilizing" and "Christianizing" them
Bureau of Indian Affairs: (BIA) agency responsible for all aspects of Indian life, especially during the assimilation period
Major Crimes Act:
General Allotment Act: (Dawes Act) act dividing up reservation lands into allotments given to individual Indians, as part of the assimilation process
Indian Citizenship Act: act granting U.S. citizenship to Indians in 1924
Indian Reorganization Act: a 1934 act that ended the practice of cultural genocide, and encouraged Indians to revive their languages, religions, and customs
Termination: policy aimed at terminating federal supervision of Indian tribes in the 1950's
Indian Self-Determination Act: (SDA) a 1975 act ending the termination policy of the 1950's
American Indian Movement: (AIM) radical activist Indian organization founded in 1968
Chinese Exclusion Act: an 1882 act barring Chinese from immigrating to the United States
Kansas-Nebraska Act: repealed the Missouri Compromise and opened up areas of the West to slavery (1854)
Emancipation Proclamation: executive proclamation issued in 1862 and in 1863 by Abraham Lincoln, freeing all slaves in the United States
Reconstruction: a period of reestablishment and reorganization of the of the seceded southern states after their defeat in the Civil War
Freedman's Bureau: during the reconstruction, Bureau set up by the federal government to provide former slaves with food, clothing, schools, and other requirements. Sometimes land from confiscated or abandoned land
Black Codes: various legal codes enacted by the Southern states to control, restrict, and inhibit the movements and behavior of ex-slaves
Jim Crow Laws: any state or federal laws that enforced the segregation of the races in various areas of American life
Racism: a belief in the innate inferiority of persons of another race and discriminatory behavior consistent with that belief
NAACP: National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, founded in 1910 by W. E. B. DuBois to advance the causes of African Americans
Civil Rights Act of 1964: sweeping Congressional act that ensured civil, political, and social rights for blacks
Voting Rights Act of 1965: act providing federal supervision of voter registration sites and prohibiting the use of literary tests
Cold War: period from the end of World War II to 1989. A propaganda war "fought" largely between the United States and the Soviet Union
Northwest Ordinance: provided for a survey of the Northwest Territories and gave the U.S. Congress rather than the states the sole right to trade with Indians
Treaty of Fort Pit: first treaty made with the Indians. It implicitly recognized the sovereignty of the Indian nations and assured them that the United States had no designs on Indian lands
Marshall Trilogy: three Supreme Court cases that defined the legal status of Native American sovereignty
Discovery Doctrine: Justice Marshall's doctrine asserting white sovereignty over the Indians by virtue of being heir to the European power that "discovered" America
Indian Removal Act: Congressional act mandating the removal of all Indians in the Southeastern states to "Indian territory" (now the state of Oklahoma)
Assimilation Period: period in which the U.S. government attempted to integrate the Indians into white society by "civilizing" and "Christianizing" them
Bureau of Indian Affairs: (BIA) agency responsible for all aspects of Indian life, especially during the assimilation period
Major Crimes Act:
General Allotment Act: (Dawes Act) act dividing up reservation lands into allotments given to individual Indians, as part of the assimilation process
Indian Citizenship Act: act granting U.S. citizenship to Indians in 1924
Indian Reorganization Act: a 1934 act that ended the practice of cultural genocide, and encouraged Indians to revive their languages, religions, and customs
Termination: policy aimed at terminating federal supervision of Indian tribes in the 1950's
Indian Self-Determination Act: (SDA) a 1975 act ending the termination policy of the 1950's
American Indian Movement: (AIM) radical activist Indian organization founded in 1968
Chinese Exclusion Act: an 1882 act barring Chinese from immigrating to the United States
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Ch. 11 Women and the Law
There are many controversies that are associated with women and the law. There are many theories associated with this issue. History proves that society was mostly patriarchal and oppressive of women. Feminism has taken a stances in the way law is applied to women. There are the radicals that say the whole legal system has to be thrown out to be replaced by one that contains no bias. On the other side there are those who believe that the current system just needs to be tweaked a little. Another debate goes on about the sameness and difference of the sexes. The sameness theory wants women to be treated as equals to men in all categories. The difference hypothesis says that women should be treated differently based on relevant differences. The compromise between sameness and difference theories in the court of law is that law must accept relevant gender differences, but that it should no focus on the differences per se, but rather on their consequences.
Historically there have been witch hunts. The females that were accused of witchcraft were generally those who were more well educated beyond their female counterparts or who spoke their minds. My family has had to deal with this issue. My great umpteenth grandmother was accused of being a witch. Her name was Rebecca Addington Chamberlain. She was seventy years old when she was thrown in jail. The jails of those times were not known to be nice places. The accused witches were "questioned" or rather tortured to figure out if they would confess. Half the time the accused died during the questioning. Rebecca died in jail before her trial began.
Law Procedure
Some claim that women are too emotional, subjective rather than objective, and lack the requisite logical capacity for law practice. Today, the modern television shows seem to promote women lawyers as either ambitious or as having an agenda. This is in contrast to the portrayal of male lawyers that have a whole spectrum of good and bad. There are probably still some people that believe that women are still not capable of practicing law.
I found that the quote that came from Apostle Paul is out of context. It says that women were made to be companions to men not their slaves. That is how I see it. Bible verse
Historically there have been witch hunts. The females that were accused of witchcraft were generally those who were more well educated beyond their female counterparts or who spoke their minds. My family has had to deal with this issue. My great umpteenth grandmother was accused of being a witch. Her name was Rebecca Addington Chamberlain. She was seventy years old when she was thrown in jail. The jails of those times were not known to be nice places. The accused witches were "questioned" or rather tortured to figure out if they would confess. Half the time the accused died during the questioning. Rebecca died in jail before her trial began.
Law Procedure
Some claim that women are too emotional, subjective rather than objective, and lack the requisite logical capacity for law practice. Today, the modern television shows seem to promote women lawyers as either ambitious or as having an agenda. This is in contrast to the portrayal of male lawyers that have a whole spectrum of good and bad. There are probably still some people that believe that women are still not capable of practicing law.
I found that the quote that came from Apostle Paul is out of context. It says that women were made to be companions to men not their slaves. That is how I see it. Bible verse
Ch. 11 Vocabulary
Feminist Jurisprudence: the practice of examining and evaluating the law from a feminist perspective
Patriarchy: "rule of the father," a system whereby males are promoted and supported over females. There is an overall male superiority because of female incompetence and sexuality.
Misogyny: the hatred, devaluation, and ridicule of women, an ideology that justifies and maintains men's subordination of women
Coverture: a legal term that describes the legal subsuming of the female person into the male in marriage
Petite treason: a charge made under early common law against women who murdered their husbands. It was considered worse than an ordinary murder because she had committed it against her "sovereign master."
UNCEFDW: United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, passed by United Nations General Assembly in 1979, in order to protect women's participation in economic and political life at the same time
ERA: Equal Rights Amendment, passed by Congress in 1972 and sent to the states for ratification but never got the thirty eight states' votes needed
Patriarchy: "rule of the father," a system whereby males are promoted and supported over females. There is an overall male superiority because of female incompetence and sexuality.
Misogyny: the hatred, devaluation, and ridicule of women, an ideology that justifies and maintains men's subordination of women
Coverture: a legal term that describes the legal subsuming of the female person into the male in marriage
Petite treason: a charge made under early common law against women who murdered their husbands. It was considered worse than an ordinary murder because she had committed it against her "sovereign master."
UNCEFDW: United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, passed by United Nations General Assembly in 1979, in order to protect women's participation in economic and political life at the same time
ERA: Equal Rights Amendment, passed by Congress in 1972 and sent to the states for ratification but never got the thirty eight states' votes needed
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Fiction Blog 4
After Ellie was almost killed in a house fire she keeps investigating the case of Rob Westerfield killing her sister. The Westerfield household has been trying to convince the public and future jury members that it was not Rob Westerfield who killed Andrea, Ellie's sister. They have apparently found a witness who saw Paulie Strobel, another kid, go into the garage where Andrea was killed. This witness Will Nebels, has a questionable background. Nebels was stealing money from the Westerfield when he happened to see Paulie go into the garage. Nebels did not tell anyone who went into the garage because he would have had to tell the police what he was doing at the time. He would have self-incriminated himself and gone to jail for stealing. The Westerfields claim that the statue of limitations has expired for the issue of stealing and that it is time the truth came out. Ellie finds out how unreliable and questionable Nebels is while going out to dinner with some acquaintances. Nebels had gotten drunk at the bar before Ellie showed up. He recognized her and in his drunken state tries to talk to her. He hugs her and kisses her while his hands roam over her body. Ellie tries to push him away but Nebels is too heavy. People from other tables finally pull him off of her. Nebels' actions could be construed as attempted rape and assault.
Ellie finds some interesting information that may convict Rob Westerfield of a different crime. When looking at his past high schools she learns that Rob was a member of the drama team. The students in the drama team were encouraged to take a stage name. Rob's stage name was Jim Wilding. The students wrote their stage names on a picture that was put up on the high school walls. It just so happens that Rob's grandmother had someone attempt to murder her. That someone left a note that had the name Jim Wilding on it. Ellie studied the handwriting from the picture and the note and concluded that the signature was the same. From Ellie's conclusion came the idea that Rob had tried to murder his grandmother for inheritance money. The mens rea is present and he almost committed the actus reus. The attempted murder would be considered an incohate crime because the murder was "partially put into operation."
Ellie finds some interesting information that may convict Rob Westerfield of a different crime. When looking at his past high schools she learns that Rob was a member of the drama team. The students in the drama team were encouraged to take a stage name. Rob's stage name was Jim Wilding. The students wrote their stage names on a picture that was put up on the high school walls. It just so happens that Rob's grandmother had someone attempt to murder her. That someone left a note that had the name Jim Wilding on it. Ellie studied the handwriting from the picture and the note and concluded that the signature was the same. From Ellie's conclusion came the idea that Rob had tried to murder his grandmother for inheritance money. The mens rea is present and he almost committed the actus reus. The attempted murder would be considered an incohate crime because the murder was "partially put into operation."
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Ch. 10 The Law and Social Change
Social change is any relatively enduring alteration in social relationship behavior patterns, values, norms, and attitudes occurring over time. Sometimes they accumulate in small mutations or in huge leaps. There are those who resist social change. They either have the most to gain from the way things are or they feel psychologically threatened. Law has played a role in social change and social change has played a role in the law. One example is the thought that alcohol causes crime. This lead to the Eighteenth Amendment or Prohibition. The actual law caused the alcohol business to go underground. Organized crime sprang up from that unsavory law. Al Capone popped up as one of the most infamous criminals with a terrible reputation for bloodshed. The Valentine's Day Massacre is an example of this. Prohibition is also an example that with the best of intentions no one knows what the consequences will be from a specific action.
Constitutions are examples. Constitutions accomplish four primary objectives. First, it legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology. Second, it provides a framework for the administration of government. Third, it regulates social and institutional behavior. Lastly, it enumerates national goals and aspirations. The Soviets had four constitutions during the lifetime of the Soviet Union. Those constitutions did not necessarily guarantee political freedom. It is interesting that the Soviet Union tried to destroy the "bourgeois family" by the methods they used. Marriages in the past could be seen as paternalistic and exploited women. I do not disagree with them about that fact. It was the ways that they tried to fix that problem that amaze me. Abortion on demand, legitimized unmarried cohabitation, divorce on demand, and the encouragement of "free love" were just some of their methods. This was one of the biggest attempts to change family life, the basic structure of any society.
I am glad that our society has mostly gotten over racism that used to plague us during the Civil War times and the considerable time after that. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments made it possible for Obama to be elected president. I am also glad for the 26th amendment which allowed me to vote for the person I thought would have the best chance of leading our country.
Obama
Constitutions are examples. Constitutions accomplish four primary objectives. First, it legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology. Second, it provides a framework for the administration of government. Third, it regulates social and institutional behavior. Lastly, it enumerates national goals and aspirations. The Soviets had four constitutions during the lifetime of the Soviet Union. Those constitutions did not necessarily guarantee political freedom. It is interesting that the Soviet Union tried to destroy the "bourgeois family" by the methods they used. Marriages in the past could be seen as paternalistic and exploited women. I do not disagree with them about that fact. It was the ways that they tried to fix that problem that amaze me. Abortion on demand, legitimized unmarried cohabitation, divorce on demand, and the encouragement of "free love" were just some of their methods. This was one of the biggest attempts to change family life, the basic structure of any society.
I am glad that our society has mostly gotten over racism that used to plague us during the Civil War times and the considerable time after that. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments made it possible for Obama to be elected president. I am also glad for the 26th amendment which allowed me to vote for the person I thought would have the best chance of leading our country.
Obama
Ch. 10 Vocabulary
Social change: any relatively enduring alteration in social relationships, behavior patterns, norms, and attitudes occurring over time
Proclamation Act: a 1763 act passed by the British Parliament forbidding white settlement in America west of the Appalachians
Constitution: a document that legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology, provides a framework for the administration of government, regulates social and institutional behavior, and enumerates national goals and aspirations
Soviet legalism: "strict and unflinching observance and fulfillment of Soviet laws by all organs of the socialist state and public organizations, institutions and all citizens, in all circumstances, and at all times
Dynamic view: a view of the Supreme Court maintaining that it can be more effective than other government branches in bringing about social change because it is free of election concerns and can act in the face of public opposition
Constrained view: a view of the Supreme Court that maintains that it can rarely produce significant social change because its practical powers are limited
Legitimacy: the ability to command compliance with rules despite the lack of objective means to compel it
Traditional authority: a type of authority that rests on long-standing usage and custom
Charismatic authority: a type of authority underlain by mythical, quasi-supernatural qualities
Rational-legal authority: a form of authority derived from rules rationally and legally enacted
Strict constructionism: a philosophy maintaining that judges must seek to discover and adhere to the "original intent" of the Framers of the Constitution when making decisions
Judicial activism: accusation made against judges when it is believed they have decided a case based on principles other than constitutional ones
Sherman Antitrust Act: passed by Congress in 1890 and designed to place controls on business
Supremacy clause: a clause in the United States Constitution stating that the authority of the United States (not the individual states) shall be the supreme law of the land
Proclamation Act: a 1763 act passed by the British Parliament forbidding white settlement in America west of the Appalachians
Constitution: a document that legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology, provides a framework for the administration of government, regulates social and institutional behavior, and enumerates national goals and aspirations
Soviet legalism: "strict and unflinching observance and fulfillment of Soviet laws by all organs of the socialist state and public organizations, institutions and all citizens, in all circumstances, and at all times
Dynamic view: a view of the Supreme Court maintaining that it can be more effective than other government branches in bringing about social change because it is free of election concerns and can act in the face of public opposition
Constrained view: a view of the Supreme Court that maintains that it can rarely produce significant social change because its practical powers are limited
Legitimacy: the ability to command compliance with rules despite the lack of objective means to compel it
Traditional authority: a type of authority that rests on long-standing usage and custom
Charismatic authority: a type of authority underlain by mythical, quasi-supernatural qualities
Rational-legal authority: a form of authority derived from rules rationally and legally enacted
Strict constructionism: a philosophy maintaining that judges must seek to discover and adhere to the "original intent" of the Framers of the Constitution when making decisions
Judicial activism: accusation made against judges when it is believed they have decided a case based on principles other than constitutional ones
Sherman Antitrust Act: passed by Congress in 1890 and designed to place controls on business
Supremacy clause: a clause in the United States Constitution stating that the authority of the United States (not the individual states) shall be the supreme law of the land
Ch. 9 The Law and Social Control
Social control is "any action, either deliberate or unconscious, that influences conduct toward conformity, whether or not the persons being influenced are aware of the process." Law's primary purpose is to establish and maintain social control. There are two different dimensions of social control: direct v. indirect and formal v. informal. Direct social control is when it is happening to you. Indirect is when you see it happening to someone else. Informal is when the community punishes the transgressor. Formal is when the the punishment is handed out by the government in legal terms. These types of social control are combined together to create four distinct social control mechanisms. Direct/Informal social control involves the stigma that is applied to the transgressor. One such example is a homeowner's association. Direct/Formal social control is when the direct formalities of the law are legally applied to the transgressor. An example of this is when you get arrested for doing something wrong. Indirect/Informal social control is when a person sees the reinforcement of social norms. An example is when someone sees someone being ridiculed. Indirect/Formal social control involves the threat of legal sanctions perceived by individuals who have not transgressed the law. One example of this is when you witness a friend being pulled over by a cop.
I see enough people speeding and those that have been pulled over by the police to know not to speed. My parents were real sticklers for not speeding. Most of the time they were in the car with me and would watch the speedometer. They would tell me to slow down and tell me the consequences of speeding: the fines if a cop pulled me over, the increase in insurance rates, the chance that I might kill myself or another, and the chance of crashing my car. Because of my parents constant nagging I gained the habit of going the speed limit. I have never gotten a ticket or been pulled over by the police. I have also never crashed my car. For my age group that is pretty good. I would guess that this might be classified as general deterrence. General deterrence is the supposed preventative effect of punishment on those who have witnessed it but not experienced it. My aunt is also a court clerk for the Puget Sound islands. She tells my uncle and nephew the fine amount whenever they do something illegal. "That's a four hundred dollars for speeding." "That's six hundred dollars for parking in the fire lane." I think that has a good deterrent effect.
speeding fines you have to read a little to find the fine amounts in Idaho
The USA PATRIOT Act was signed October 26, 2001, by President George W. Bush. This act was passed in reaction to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It allows the government more leeway in searching for potential terrorists within the United States. They can tap more phones, emails, medical, financial, and other records. The act passed by large majorities of both houses and was supported by by democrats and republicans. I think that Congress was still in shock and were afraid when they created and passed the act. They gave up some liberty or privacy to gain a little security. In my opinion the act takes away too much freedom and restricts our privacy. Ben Franklin once said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." I am in agreement with him. We are losing our freedoms to fear and security.
USA PATRIOT Act
I see enough people speeding and those that have been pulled over by the police to know not to speed. My parents were real sticklers for not speeding. Most of the time they were in the car with me and would watch the speedometer. They would tell me to slow down and tell me the consequences of speeding: the fines if a cop pulled me over, the increase in insurance rates, the chance that I might kill myself or another, and the chance of crashing my car. Because of my parents constant nagging I gained the habit of going the speed limit. I have never gotten a ticket or been pulled over by the police. I have also never crashed my car. For my age group that is pretty good. I would guess that this might be classified as general deterrence. General deterrence is the supposed preventative effect of punishment on those who have witnessed it but not experienced it. My aunt is also a court clerk for the Puget Sound islands. She tells my uncle and nephew the fine amount whenever they do something illegal. "That's a four hundred dollars for speeding." "That's six hundred dollars for parking in the fire lane." I think that has a good deterrent effect.
speeding fines you have to read a little to find the fine amounts in Idaho
The USA PATRIOT Act was signed October 26, 2001, by President George W. Bush. This act was passed in reaction to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It allows the government more leeway in searching for potential terrorists within the United States. They can tap more phones, emails, medical, financial, and other records. The act passed by large majorities of both houses and was supported by by democrats and republicans. I think that Congress was still in shock and were afraid when they created and passed the act. They gave up some liberty or privacy to gain a little security. In my opinion the act takes away too much freedom and restricts our privacy. Ben Franklin once said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." I am in agreement with him. We are losing our freedoms to fear and security.
USA PATRIOT Act
Ch. 9 Vocabulary
Social control: any action either deliberate or unconscious, that influences conduct toward conformity, whether or not the persons being influenced are aware of the process
Anomie: a condition of relative nomlessness or social deregulation in society
Direct/Informal social control: social control via the informal application of stigma applied to the transgressor
Direct/Formal social control: social control via the direct formalities of law (i.e., punishment) legally applied to the transgressor
Indirect/Informal social control: social control by reinforcing norms
Indirect/Formal social control: social control via the threat of legal sanctions perceived by individuals who have not transgressed the law
Specific deterrence: the supposed preventative effect of imposed punishment of the future behavior of the person punished
Contrast effect: the contrast between the circumstances of punishment suffered and an offender's usual life; the greater the contrast, the greater the deterrent effect
General deterrence: the supposed preventative effect of punishment on those who have witnessed it but not experienced it
Compensatory style: a form of social control in which some person or group has accused another person or group of breaching an obligation and brings the matter before the courts seeking compensation
Conciliatory style: a form of social control using the law to remedy a breach in a formerly harmonious relationship. Blame is not usually assigned in such matters
Penal style: style of social control attained by punishing violators of the criminal law
Therapeutic style: style of social control aimed at those considered in need of treatment rather than punishment; a remedial style
Plea bargaining: process in which the defendant in a criminal case pleads guilty in exchange for a more lenient sentence than he or she would otherwise face
USA Patriot Act: act passed in response to 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States and which expanded the authority of law enforcement to fight terrorism
Writ of Mandamus: a court order compelling a public official to do his or her duty
Anomie: a condition of relative nomlessness or social deregulation in society
Direct/Informal social control: social control via the informal application of stigma applied to the transgressor
Direct/Formal social control: social control via the direct formalities of law (i.e., punishment) legally applied to the transgressor
Indirect/Informal social control: social control by reinforcing norms
Indirect/Formal social control: social control via the threat of legal sanctions perceived by individuals who have not transgressed the law
Specific deterrence: the supposed preventative effect of imposed punishment of the future behavior of the person punished
Contrast effect: the contrast between the circumstances of punishment suffered and an offender's usual life; the greater the contrast, the greater the deterrent effect
General deterrence: the supposed preventative effect of punishment on those who have witnessed it but not experienced it
Compensatory style: a form of social control in which some person or group has accused another person or group of breaching an obligation and brings the matter before the courts seeking compensation
Conciliatory style: a form of social control using the law to remedy a breach in a formerly harmonious relationship. Blame is not usually assigned in such matters
Penal style: style of social control attained by punishing violators of the criminal law
Therapeutic style: style of social control aimed at those considered in need of treatment rather than punishment; a remedial style
Plea bargaining: process in which the defendant in a criminal case pleads guilty in exchange for a more lenient sentence than he or she would otherwise face
USA Patriot Act: act passed in response to 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States and which expanded the authority of law enforcement to fight terrorism
Writ of Mandamus: a court order compelling a public official to do his or her duty
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Ch. 8 Vocabulary
Delinquent: a minor who commits acts that are crimes when committed by adults
Status offenses: noncriminal offenses such as truancy and ungovernable that apply only to individuals whose status is that of a juvenile
CHINS: "children in need of supervision" states use this term when they have not relinquished jurisdiction over status offenders
Patria Potestas: "fatherly power" the power of the father over his family
Paterna Pietas: "fatherly love" limiting the power of the fathers
Parens Patriae: "father of his country" the obligation of the state to care for people in need of care and protection, such as children and the mentally ill
Binding out: the practice of assigning children to foster parents as indentured servants
Brideswell: early English institutions for housing and training youthful offenders. Usually place where the treatment of children was harsh and the owners used the children as free labor to fill their pockets with money
Progressives: a nineteenth century group of liberal reformers who argued for the professionalization of public service
Child Savers: liberals whose goal was to reform the juvenile justice system
Waived: a term used to describe a juvenile being transferred (waived) from juvenile to adult court because of the seriousness of the crime. The juveniles are then subject to criminal prosecution and punishments of the adult court.
Judicial waiver: transfer of a juvenile to criminal court decided by a juvenile court judge at his or her own discretion after a full inquiry into the matter
Prosecutorial discretion: type of waiver (also known as a direct file) allowing prosecutors file certain juvenile cases in either juvenile or adult court
Statutory exclusion: an automatic waiver (also called a legislative waiver) applied when state legislatures have statutorily excluded serious offenses from the juvenile courts, based on age
Amicus Curiae brief: "friend of the court" briefs presented to the court arguing in favor of one side or the other by interested parties not directly involved in the case
Megan's Law: requires law enforcement agencies in all fifty states to register sex offenders in their area
Restorative Justice: an approach to criminal justice aiming to repair the harm done by an agreeable restorative solution
Status offenses: noncriminal offenses such as truancy and ungovernable that apply only to individuals whose status is that of a juvenile
CHINS: "children in need of supervision" states use this term when they have not relinquished jurisdiction over status offenders
Patria Potestas: "fatherly power" the power of the father over his family
Paterna Pietas: "fatherly love" limiting the power of the fathers
Parens Patriae: "father of his country" the obligation of the state to care for people in need of care and protection, such as children and the mentally ill
Binding out: the practice of assigning children to foster parents as indentured servants
Brideswell: early English institutions for housing and training youthful offenders. Usually place where the treatment of children was harsh and the owners used the children as free labor to fill their pockets with money
Progressives: a nineteenth century group of liberal reformers who argued for the professionalization of public service
Child Savers: liberals whose goal was to reform the juvenile justice system
Waived: a term used to describe a juvenile being transferred (waived) from juvenile to adult court because of the seriousness of the crime. The juveniles are then subject to criminal prosecution and punishments of the adult court.
Judicial waiver: transfer of a juvenile to criminal court decided by a juvenile court judge at his or her own discretion after a full inquiry into the matter
Prosecutorial discretion: type of waiver (also known as a direct file) allowing prosecutors file certain juvenile cases in either juvenile or adult court
Statutory exclusion: an automatic waiver (also called a legislative waiver) applied when state legislatures have statutorily excluded serious offenses from the juvenile courts, based on age
Amicus Curiae brief: "friend of the court" briefs presented to the court arguing in favor of one side or the other by interested parties not directly involved in the case
Megan's Law: requires law enforcement agencies in all fifty states to register sex offenders in their area
Restorative Justice: an approach to criminal justice aiming to repair the harm done by an agreeable restorative solution
Ch. 8 Juvenile Justice
Juvenile justice is considered to be civil law rather than criminal law. One of the reasons for this distinction is because of how the courts are operated and the intended purpose of the courts. Adult court punishes the guilty while juvenile court wants to rehabilitate the juveniles so that they can become a contributing member of society. There are two different types of juveniles offenses. Status offenses are those that underage persons are not allowed to do. These include running away, smoking, truancy, and having sex. Minors, underage persons, are assumed to not have the mental capability or maturity to make these decisions. Delinquency offenses are those offenses that are criminal in an adult court. Some examples include murder, stealing, and vandalism. Some states have relinquished jurisdiction over status offenders to social service agencies. There are many different terms used in juvenile courts that differ from adult courts. A juvenile, defendant, can be held responsible, guilty, for a crime. Juveniles are not arrested they are detained. A trial is called a hearing in juvenile court. Sometimes due to the severity of the crime or the age of the juvenile the case can be waived to adult court. This means that the juvenile will be tried as an adult and will receive an adult level punishment. There will be no rehabilitation to integrate the juvenile into society. There have been trends in history where juveniles have been prosecuted more harshly and as well as periods that have seen a relaxing in the punishments of juveniles.
There has been a tendency of late to waive juvenile cases up to adult courts. This has cause some to question the need for a juvenile court system. They have posed the question that if all the juvenile cases are being waived there is no reason for a juvenile court system at all. To counter this position others have raised valid points on the maturity of the juveniles being prosecuted. Many believe that younger offenders do not fully understand the implications of what they are doing and that should be taken into account in the trial process. Others believe that the younger offenders should have their life ruined when they could be rehabilitated instead. Still others suggest that imprisoning the young offenders will just make them harden criminals. I tend to side with those who think the Juvenile court system should stay around but there are cases where some juveniles cannot be rehabilitated or their crimes are so hideous that they need to sequestered away from society. My mother raised the question about sociopathic/psychopathic juveniles who would by the defintion of their condition cannot be cured or rehabilitated. What good does the juvenile justice system do them? They will never be cured and unlikely to stop their behavior. They would be a danger to society. My question is that these individuals have learned to imitate normal human emotions and are usually very good actors. It would be hard to tell them from regular individuals.
Eight Yr. Old
There has been a tendency of late to waive juvenile cases up to adult courts. This has cause some to question the need for a juvenile court system. They have posed the question that if all the juvenile cases are being waived there is no reason for a juvenile court system at all. To counter this position others have raised valid points on the maturity of the juveniles being prosecuted. Many believe that younger offenders do not fully understand the implications of what they are doing and that should be taken into account in the trial process. Others believe that the younger offenders should have their life ruined when they could be rehabilitated instead. Still others suggest that imprisoning the young offenders will just make them harden criminals. I tend to side with those who think the Juvenile court system should stay around but there are cases where some juveniles cannot be rehabilitated or their crimes are so hideous that they need to sequestered away from society. My mother raised the question about sociopathic/psychopathic juveniles who would by the defintion of their condition cannot be cured or rehabilitated. What good does the juvenile justice system do them? They will never be cured and unlikely to stop their behavior. They would be a danger to society. My question is that these individuals have learned to imitate normal human emotions and are usually very good actors. It would be hard to tell them from regular individuals.
Eight Yr. Old
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Ch. 7 Civil and Administrative Law
Civil law includes tort law, property law, contract law, and family law. Property law focuses on the ownership and acquisition of property through conveyances and inheritances. There are several different types of property. There is personal property which is the movable objects owned by a person. Real property is the land or the permanent attachments to the land. Lastly, there is intellectual property which is the ideas or concepts developed by an individual or group.
Water rights seem to be real property. Some laws have been made that deal with the protection of the environment. It is not surprising that there have been laws made to deal with the protection of the environment. There used to be companies that dumped their sewage into rivers. The pollution usually killed off the creatures that lived in the rivers. Sometimes the animals would have malformations from the chemicals in the water. Sometimes companies might use so much water that they drain aquifers, rivers, and streams. That has an entirely negative effect on the environment. Animals would die from lack of water or would move to areas with water. Those places might be near people and would cause problems. Plants would sicken and die of the lack of water.
On our property there is a well. It is our sole source of water. The entire subdivision has wells. The land adjacent to our is made up of several hundred acres of grazing land. A developer purchased the property. Because the adjacent land had their well drilled prior to the time our well was drilled gives the developer the right to pump water at historical levels. This developer overestimated the amount of water and plans to pump enough water to supply his development with water. His development would have several hundred homes or around 1800 homes. Pumping at this level will endanger our already scarce water resources in our small valley. One theory suggests that pumping at the rates the developer wanted would have drained the aquifer that supplies the whole valley. We have banded together in our subdivision and hired water adjudication lawyers to fight the developer. The developer initially suggested that our subdivision hook up to city water. United Water will not run lines into our subdivision to serve just 22 homes. Also the cost of watering five acres at United Water rates would bankrupt the whole subdivision. We have now signed a preliminary agreement that allows the developer to pump water at a rate that a grazing operation would pump rather than at a rate a farmer would pump. To the developer this means that he will need to subsidize his water with water from the city or United Water. To us this means that our meager well water pumping will continue to provide enough water to survive on. The only way we got any leverage in this situation was for the community to band together to fight a developer with deep pockets and connections with the city council.
http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241492.html
Obama Water Rights case
Family law is the set of laws that involve marriage, child custody, and other issues arising in personal relationships. One major law that affected marriage was DOMA. The Defense of Marriage Act stated that the states are not required to acknowledge a marriage between same sex couples. It also says that " 'marriage' means the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." I know a lot about this law since I researched it for my senior project. Here is what it actually says. I am inclined to disbelieve the author of the book about his interpretation on the law.
DOMA
Water rights seem to be real property. Some laws have been made that deal with the protection of the environment. It is not surprising that there have been laws made to deal with the protection of the environment. There used to be companies that dumped their sewage into rivers. The pollution usually killed off the creatures that lived in the rivers. Sometimes the animals would have malformations from the chemicals in the water. Sometimes companies might use so much water that they drain aquifers, rivers, and streams. That has an entirely negative effect on the environment. Animals would die from lack of water or would move to areas with water. Those places might be near people and would cause problems. Plants would sicken and die of the lack of water.
On our property there is a well. It is our sole source of water. The entire subdivision has wells. The land adjacent to our is made up of several hundred acres of grazing land. A developer purchased the property. Because the adjacent land had their well drilled prior to the time our well was drilled gives the developer the right to pump water at historical levels. This developer overestimated the amount of water and plans to pump enough water to supply his development with water. His development would have several hundred homes or around 1800 homes. Pumping at this level will endanger our already scarce water resources in our small valley. One theory suggests that pumping at the rates the developer wanted would have drained the aquifer that supplies the whole valley. We have banded together in our subdivision and hired water adjudication lawyers to fight the developer. The developer initially suggested that our subdivision hook up to city water. United Water will not run lines into our subdivision to serve just 22 homes. Also the cost of watering five acres at United Water rates would bankrupt the whole subdivision. We have now signed a preliminary agreement that allows the developer to pump water at a rate that a grazing operation would pump rather than at a rate a farmer would pump. To the developer this means that he will need to subsidize his water with water from the city or United Water. To us this means that our meager well water pumping will continue to provide enough water to survive on. The only way we got any leverage in this situation was for the community to band together to fight a developer with deep pockets and connections with the city council.
http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241492.html
Obama Water Rights case
Family law is the set of laws that involve marriage, child custody, and other issues arising in personal relationships. One major law that affected marriage was DOMA. The Defense of Marriage Act stated that the states are not required to acknowledge a marriage between same sex couples. It also says that " 'marriage' means the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife." I know a lot about this law since I researched it for my senior project. Here is what it actually says. I am inclined to disbelieve the author of the book about his interpretation on the law.
DOMA
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Fiction Blog 3
Ellie investigates the rumors about Rob Westerfield. Rob, his father, and the Westerfield lawyer happen to come upon Ellie as she is eating lunch at a restaurant. Rob proposes that they make amends and work together to find the real killer of Ellie's sister. Ellie brushes his offer off saying that she knew who killed her sister and it was just a matter of putting him back behind bars. Later on someone tries to kill her during her investigations. They burn down the home that Ellie is staying in. Ellie manages to escape with a few blisters and minor smoke inhalation. The sheriff of the county theorized that some of the inmates that shared a cell with Rob Westerfield might think badly of Ellie when she goes looking for dirt on Westerfield. There were no field identifications made since Ellie did not see who started the fire. It can be argued that the criminal who set the fire could be charged with first degree arson. First degree arson is defined as the burning of an occupied structure. It is apparent to me that the person was trying to murder Ellie in the process.
Ch. 7 Vocabulary
Civil law: the area of common law regulating the conduct of private parties and their relationships.
Specific performance: in civil law, when a court orders someone to do (or not do) something
Preponderance of the evidence: the standard of proof in civil cases
Clear and convincing: a standard of proof in civil law that falls between the usual preponderance of evidence and criminal law's beyond a reasonable doubt
Punitive damages: monetary awards beyond compensation that are designed to punish the defendant and to deter others
Involuntary commitment: the use of legal means to commit someone to a mental institution against his or her will
Res judicata: "thing decided" civil law analogue of the prohibition against double jeopardy. Once a case has been through all possible appeals it is decided forever
Negligence: a failure to act with the appropriate level of care
Ordinary care: the level of care required to avoid committing a negligent act and being civilly liable in tort law.
Contributory negligence: a legal rule now mostly out of favor that states that if an injured party was in anyway partially responsible for his or her injuries he or she was barred from collecting from the tortfeasor
Comparative negligence: a legal doctrine that attempts to apportion the responsibility for negligent conduct among the parties involved
Consent: a defense to some crimes in which a person granting consent is harmed. A claim of consent must demonstrate that it was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent
Immunity: in law, the concept that some people (judges for actions that fall within the purview of judicial duties) or entities (sovereign states) are immune from legal prosecution for their actions
Property: the right of ownership or possession of an item, which may be real, personal, or intangible
Freehold estate: one wherein a person owns a piece of property as distinguished from only a right to use property (as in a rental agreement)
Fee simple estate: an interest in real property that ends when the person dies-at which time the interest reverts to the original owner of the property
Fee simple absolute estate: one in which the property interest does not revert to the original owner
Tenancy in common: exists when multiple parties share equally in the ownership or possession of real property
Easement: a limited right to use another's real property for a specific purpose and time period
Adverse possession: legal doctrine that allows someone to take the real property of another, if they have used it openly and continuously for a period of time
Bailment: the temporary transfer of possession of personal property to another, for a particular purpose
Contract: a legally enforceable document
Uniform Commercial Code: a code of law concerning contracts designed to standardize trade and contract practices among merchants and businesses
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): a 1996 federal act defining marriage as a contract that only people of the opposite sexes can enter into
No-fault divorce: divorce granted without assigning fault for the breakup of the marriage.
Annulment: a legal determination that a vaild marriage never existed between the parties
Dual-property: a family law model for dividing property after a divorce; states using this model divide equally all property held jointly that was acquired during the marriage
All-property: a family law model for dividing property after a divorce; states using this model divide equally all property held jointly regardless of when it was acquired
Administrative law: a body of law (also known as regulatory law) created by administrative agencies by the powers granted to them by Congress
Administrative Procedure Act (APA): this 1946 act established the procedural standards federal agencies must follow when adjudicating violations of administrative law
Chevron deference: the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court that courts must defer to agency interpretations of their own laws
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOA): act passed by Congress in 2002 designed to crack down on white-collar crime
White-Collar Crimes Penalty Enhancement Act: act passed in conjunction with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It enhanced penalties for white-collar crimes and relaxed evidentiary rules for prosecuting them
- Tort law: the body of civil law associated with harm caused to plaintiffs by the action or inaction of defendants
- Property law: a form of civil law that focuses on the ownership and acquisition of property through conveyances and inheritances.
- Contract law: a form of civil law governing the conduct of business, which deals with the enforceability of private agreements between individuals and between organizations.
- Family law: the set of laws involving marriage, child custody, and other issues arising in personal relationships
- Juvenile law: laws regulating the behavior of minors
Specific performance: in civil law, when a court orders someone to do (or not do) something
Preponderance of the evidence: the standard of proof in civil cases
Clear and convincing: a standard of proof in civil law that falls between the usual preponderance of evidence and criminal law's beyond a reasonable doubt
Punitive damages: monetary awards beyond compensation that are designed to punish the defendant and to deter others
Involuntary commitment: the use of legal means to commit someone to a mental institution against his or her will
Res judicata: "thing decided" civil law analogue of the prohibition against double jeopardy. Once a case has been through all possible appeals it is decided forever
Negligence: a failure to act with the appropriate level of care
Ordinary care: the level of care required to avoid committing a negligent act and being civilly liable in tort law.
Contributory negligence: a legal rule now mostly out of favor that states that if an injured party was in anyway partially responsible for his or her injuries he or she was barred from collecting from the tortfeasor
Comparative negligence: a legal doctrine that attempts to apportion the responsibility for negligent conduct among the parties involved
Consent: a defense to some crimes in which a person granting consent is harmed. A claim of consent must demonstrate that it was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent
Immunity: in law, the concept that some people (judges for actions that fall within the purview of judicial duties) or entities (sovereign states) are immune from legal prosecution for their actions
Property: the right of ownership or possession of an item, which may be real, personal, or intangible
Freehold estate: one wherein a person owns a piece of property as distinguished from only a right to use property (as in a rental agreement)
Fee simple estate: an interest in real property that ends when the person dies-at which time the interest reverts to the original owner of the property
Fee simple absolute estate: one in which the property interest does not revert to the original owner
Tenancy in common: exists when multiple parties share equally in the ownership or possession of real property
Easement: a limited right to use another's real property for a specific purpose and time period
Adverse possession: legal doctrine that allows someone to take the real property of another, if they have used it openly and continuously for a period of time
Bailment: the temporary transfer of possession of personal property to another, for a particular purpose
Contract: a legally enforceable document
Uniform Commercial Code: a code of law concerning contracts designed to standardize trade and contract practices among merchants and businesses
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): a 1996 federal act defining marriage as a contract that only people of the opposite sexes can enter into
No-fault divorce: divorce granted without assigning fault for the breakup of the marriage.
Annulment: a legal determination that a vaild marriage never existed between the parties
Dual-property: a family law model for dividing property after a divorce; states using this model divide equally all property held jointly that was acquired during the marriage
All-property: a family law model for dividing property after a divorce; states using this model divide equally all property held jointly regardless of when it was acquired
Administrative law: a body of law (also known as regulatory law) created by administrative agencies by the powers granted to them by Congress
Administrative Procedure Act (APA): this 1946 act established the procedural standards federal agencies must follow when adjudicating violations of administrative law
Chevron deference: the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court that courts must defer to agency interpretations of their own laws
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOA): act passed by Congress in 2002 designed to crack down on white-collar crime
White-Collar Crimes Penalty Enhancement Act: act passed in conjunction with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It enhanced penalties for white-collar crimes and relaxed evidentiary rules for prosecuting them
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Ch. 6 Criminal Procedure
Most times an officer needs a warrant to search and/or seize items, places, and people. There are a few exceptions or instances when this policy does not come into play. One instance of when an officer does not need a warrant, a written document permitting the officer to search or seize something, is when contraband in is plain sight of the officer. The Plain Sight (plain view) doctrine is restricted to items that the police officer can see from their vantage point. The officer must also have probable cause to suspect that the item or items are illegal, contraband. There also used to be a restriction that required the observations to be inadvertent or accidentally seen not purposefully seen. That restriction was overturned in the case Horton v. California.
There is an interesting case where there was Plain Sight Negligence. It is the illinoisinjury link. It details the events that lead to a stolen vehicle and the subsequent injury that was resulted from the stealing of the vehicle. Two friends allowed an acquaintance to spend the night at their house. This acquaintance stole the keys to their car and went on a joy ride. The joy ride ended in the injury of an innocent bystander. The plaintiff claims that the two friends are liable for the damages done by the acquaintance since it was reasonably foreseeable that the acquaintance would steal the car. The friends knew that their acquaintance had no permanent place of residence and was a crack cocaine addict. The plaintiff argues that the knowledge of the behavior of the acquaintance should have been a signal to the friends that something like the stealing of the car could happen. The friends oppose this view. The friends counter this view saying that it was not foreseeable that the acquaintance would steal the car because they did not leave the keys to the car in plain sight. The keys were hidden in a lunch box that was not left out in the open. In the end the court affirmed the lower court's ruling that the friends are liable.
I remember when I was in high school and they would have us practice our lock down drill. We would lock the doors and put strips of paper over the windows in the doors so no one could see into the classrooms. Every time they had practice lock down drills I could hear the administrators checking lockers with drug sniffing dogs. I think they used the drills as a way to keep the students from interfering or observing the search for drugs in the lockers. I suppose the students don't have any reasonable expectation of privacy because the lockers belong to the school and not the students. The school doesn't need warrants to search the lockers because it is an exception to the warrant clause. This particular incidence would fall under the Needs of Law Enforcement exception. The public school is an agent of the state and must act in the best interests of the students under the law. I have never thought of my teachers as state agents but it makes sense in the whole scheme of things.
http://www.illinoisinjurylawyerblog.com/2009/03/case_law_update_plain_sight_ne.html
There are some notes on the plain view doctrine in this link below.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/04.html
Monday, October 12, 2009
Ch. 6 Vocabulary
Particularity: means that the warrant must make clear on its face who or what is to be searched or seized, so as to limit the discretion of the police officer.
Seizure: involves the exercise of dominion or control by the police over a person or item.
Detention: when a reasonable person, viewing the particular police conduct as a whole and within the setting of all the surrounding circumstances, would have concluded that the police in some way had restrained his/her liberty so that the person was not free to leave.
Effects: include papers, cars, and other like items. Items sought may include contraband, fruits of the crime, instruments of the crime such as weapons, burglar's tools, or the getaway car, or evidence of the crime.
Curtilage: the land and buildings immediately surrounding, and intimately associated with a dwelling.
Open Fields: refers to everything that is not defined as being within the curtilage.
De Minimis: "the least," or negligible, intrusion on individual liberty.
Miranda Warnings: warning given by police to arrested suspects, informing them of both the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel. Evidence obtained by the police during a custodial interrogation of a suspect could not be used at trial unless the suspect first was informed of these rights.
Ex Parte Evidence: hearsay statements made outside of the courtroom.
Seizure: involves the exercise of dominion or control by the police over a person or item.
Detention: when a reasonable person, viewing the particular police conduct as a whole and within the setting of all the surrounding circumstances, would have concluded that the police in some way had restrained his/her liberty so that the person was not free to leave.
Effects: include papers, cars, and other like items. Items sought may include contraband, fruits of the crime, instruments of the crime such as weapons, burglar's tools, or the getaway car, or evidence of the crime.
Curtilage: the land and buildings immediately surrounding, and intimately associated with a dwelling.
Open Fields: refers to everything that is not defined as being within the curtilage.De Minimis: "the least," or negligible, intrusion on individual liberty.
Miranda Warnings: warning given by police to arrested suspects, informing them of both the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel. Evidence obtained by the police during a custodial interrogation of a suspect could not be used at trial unless the suspect first was informed of these rights.
Ex Parte Evidence: hearsay statements made outside of the courtroom.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Fiction Blog 2
Ellie has saved all the articles that came up in the paper that had to deal with the murder of her sister. She even has the trial transcript. While she is looking through the witness testimonies she comes across what she said during the trial. At the time of the trial Ellie was seven years old and the defense attorney was trying to pressure Ellie into testifying the way he wanted her to. Ellie claimed to have felt a locket that had been given to Andrea by Rob Westerfield when she stumbled upon the body of her sister, Andrea. The defense attorney tried to twist the meaning of the words that came out of Ellie's mouth. In frustration Ellie yelled at the defense attorney that she wasn't making up stories about the locket and she knew that Rob Westerfield had killed Andrea. The remark was stricken from the record because it would give unfair bias to the prosecution.
Ellie has started investigating the case on her own. She is trying to write a book that will convince everyone of Rob Westerfield's guilt. She is writing the book because Rob Westerfield has been released from jail. He served his full time in jail. She came back to her home town in order to find more information for her book research. While there she meets some of her mother's old friends. They talk about nothing in particular and offer to let Ellie stay in the guest apartment above the garage. Ellie takes them up on the offer. She decides that it would be good to research how well behaved Rob was in jail and why he was kicked out of so many private schools. Apparently prisons aren't allowed to talk to strangers about the conduct of the prisoners. She goes over to the prison and holds up a sign with her name, number, and reason for holding the sign. Ellie waves it around so people can see. She notices that a few people look interested. She comes back to the guest apartment to find that it has been burglarized. The mysterious person didn't take anything but had written all over her papers and transcript.
Ellie has started investigating the case on her own. She is trying to write a book that will convince everyone of Rob Westerfield's guilt. She is writing the book because Rob Westerfield has been released from jail. He served his full time in jail. She came back to her home town in order to find more information for her book research. While there she meets some of her mother's old friends. They talk about nothing in particular and offer to let Ellie stay in the guest apartment above the garage. Ellie takes them up on the offer. She decides that it would be good to research how well behaved Rob was in jail and why he was kicked out of so many private schools. Apparently prisons aren't allowed to talk to strangers about the conduct of the prisoners. She goes over to the prison and holds up a sign with her name, number, and reason for holding the sign. Ellie waves it around so people can see. She notices that a few people look interested. She comes back to the guest apartment to find that it has been burglarized. The mysterious person didn't take anything but had written all over her papers and transcript.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Ch. 5 Crime and Criminal Law Discussion
Homicide is the killing of another person. Murder is "the willful (non-negligent) killing of one human being by another" as defined by the the FBI. Murder is the most serious crime that is universally held by all cultures. Punishments for murder are the most severe. Some states argue that capital punishment or the death penalty is a fitting and just penalty for taking another person's life. There are many different forms of the death penalty. Electrocution and lethal injection are just a few methods. Shooting squad and hanging are still options although they are almost never used. There are some people who suggest that the death penalty is cruel and unusual and is therefore against the law. They also say that it is immoral. One of their arguments is "why should we stoop down to their level in order to get revenge." These people indicate that it is worse for them to be locked up for the rest of their lives than to be simply put to death. Either way the debate goes on and more people are put to death in the intervening time period.
There are also some that suggest that abortion is a form of murder. This depends on the definition of a human being. Is the fertilization of an egg a human or is when the egg implants into the wall of the uterus? Others imply that it is after the first trimester that you can call the fetus a human being or even a baby. This creates more controversy since some women say they have a right to their own bodies and would fight a law that would infringe upon their rights.
I would also like to point out that killing the enemies in war is also homicide. It is during wartime and the point of war is to defeat your enemies, usually by killing more of your enemy's forces than he does to yours. The more you kill, the more you can wear them down. Then you take them over thus winning the war and whatever you were fighting for. Some might say that it is justified to kill during wartime since if you did not kill your opponent he would kill you instead. I think that it is pointless homicide and can perhaps even be defined as murder.
I would like to pose a question to those who read this. Suppose that someone attacks you and you defend yourself because there are no other options that will allow you get away unharmed. If in defending yourself the attacker dies, is it still defined as murder? You killed that person and you probably meant to hurt them at the time you were being attacked.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state
There are also some that suggest that abortion is a form of murder. This depends on the definition of a human being. Is the fertilization of an egg a human or is when the egg implants into the wall of the uterus? Others imply that it is after the first trimester that you can call the fetus a human being or even a baby. This creates more controversy since some women say they have a right to their own bodies and would fight a law that would infringe upon their rights.
I would also like to point out that killing the enemies in war is also homicide. It is during wartime and the point of war is to defeat your enemies, usually by killing more of your enemy's forces than he does to yours. The more you kill, the more you can wear them down. Then you take them over thus winning the war and whatever you were fighting for. Some might say that it is justified to kill during wartime since if you did not kill your opponent he would kill you instead. I think that it is pointless homicide and can perhaps even be defined as murder.
I would like to pose a question to those who read this. Suppose that someone attacks you and you defend yourself because there are no other options that will allow you get away unharmed. If in defending yourself the attacker dies, is it still defined as murder? You killed that person and you probably meant to hurt them at the time you were being attacked.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state
Friday, September 25, 2009
Ch. 5 Vocabulary
Substantive Law: defined by statute, it prescribes (what we should do) and proscribes (what we should not do) various types of conduct.
Crime: (1) an act in violation of a (2) criminal law for which a (3) punishment is prescribed; the person committing it must have (4) intended to do so and to have done so without legally acceptable (5) defense or justification.
Uniform Crime Reports: (UCR) the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual report of crimes committed in the United States. It comprises Part I and Part II offenses. The UCR defines eight crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson) as Part I offenses. Part II offenses are a mixture of mala prohibita offenses and less serious mala in se offenses.
Substantive Due Process: a constitutional principle that holds that in addition to procedural rights the law must protect substantive rights, such as the right to possess or to say or do certain things.
Overbreadth Doctrine: a criminal law violates the overbreadth doctrine when it fails to narrowly define the specific behavior to be restricted.
Void For Vagueness Doctrine: a statute is void for vagueness if it fails to clearly define both the act prohibited and the appropriate punishment in advance.
Ex Post Facto Law: criminalizing an act already completed but not previously forbidden by the penal code.
Bills of Attainder: legislation imposing punishment without trial.
Corpus Delicti: refers to the five elements of criminal liability, each of which must be pleaded guilty.
Actus Reus: meaning "a guilty act," if refers to the three forms of the criminal act: (1) voluntary bodily movements, (2) an omission in the face of a duty to act, and (3) possession.
Mens Rea: "guilty mind." Liability generally does not attach based on action alone; there also must exist some sort of guilty mind.
Model Penal Code: in relation to modern criminal law, it sets forth four levels of intent: purposeful, knowing, reckless, and negligent.
Negligence: a failure to act with the appropriate level of care.
Doctrine of Transferred Intent: applies to situations where a person intended to harm A but in error harmed B.
Concurrence: the union of the criminal act (actus reus) and criminal intent (mens rea).
Causation: the legal principle that the criminal act is the act that is the cause of the harm. There are two types of causation: factual and legal.
Factual Cause: refers to the idea that "but for" the actor's conduct the harm would not have occurred. It is an initial act that sets a series of other acts in motion that leads to some harm. Factual causation is a necessary but not sufficient element for the imposition of criminal liability. A legal cause also must exist.
Legal Cause: also referred to as proximate cause. The proximity in time between the accused's actions and the ultimate degree of harm caused to the victim. The question often asked is such cases is "for which act does it seem fair and just to hold the actor accountable?" Consequences of an act which are not reasonably foreseeable to the actor are "intervening causes" and may serve to relieve the actor of criminal liability.
Proximate Cause: the legal principle that the criminal act is the one that is the most significant and it seems fair and just to hold the actor accountable for his or her actions.
Harm: the result of the act, the injury to another.
Strict Liability: Imposes accountability without proof of criminal intent in situations where society deems it fair to do so, such as violations of drug and alcohol sales laws.
Vicarious Liability: refers to the imputation of accountability from one person to another, usually the individual's superior.
Inchoate Crimes: crimes that occur in preparation for an offense. Inchoate means "to begin" or "to partially put into operation."
Crime: (1) an act in violation of a (2) criminal law for which a (3) punishment is prescribed; the person committing it must have (4) intended to do so and to have done so without legally acceptable (5) defense or justification.
Uniform Crime Reports: (UCR) the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual report of crimes committed in the United States. It comprises Part I and Part II offenses. The UCR defines eight crimes (murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson) as Part I offenses. Part II offenses are a mixture of mala prohibita offenses and less serious mala in se offenses.
Substantive Due Process: a constitutional principle that holds that in addition to procedural rights the law must protect substantive rights, such as the right to possess or to say or do certain things.
Overbreadth Doctrine: a criminal law violates the overbreadth doctrine when it fails to narrowly define the specific behavior to be restricted.
Void For Vagueness Doctrine: a statute is void for vagueness if it fails to clearly define both the act prohibited and the appropriate punishment in advance.
Ex Post Facto Law: criminalizing an act already completed but not previously forbidden by the penal code.
Bills of Attainder: legislation imposing punishment without trial.
Corpus Delicti: refers to the five elements of criminal liability, each of which must be pleaded guilty.
Actus Reus: meaning "a guilty act," if refers to the three forms of the criminal act: (1) voluntary bodily movements, (2) an omission in the face of a duty to act, and (3) possession.
Mens Rea: "guilty mind." Liability generally does not attach based on action alone; there also must exist some sort of guilty mind.
Model Penal Code: in relation to modern criminal law, it sets forth four levels of intent: purposeful, knowing, reckless, and negligent.
Negligence: a failure to act with the appropriate level of care.
Doctrine of Transferred Intent: applies to situations where a person intended to harm A but in error harmed B.
Concurrence: the union of the criminal act (actus reus) and criminal intent (mens rea).
Causation: the legal principle that the criminal act is the act that is the cause of the harm. There are two types of causation: factual and legal.
Factual Cause: refers to the idea that "but for" the actor's conduct the harm would not have occurred. It is an initial act that sets a series of other acts in motion that leads to some harm. Factual causation is a necessary but not sufficient element for the imposition of criminal liability. A legal cause also must exist.
Legal Cause: also referred to as proximate cause. The proximity in time between the accused's actions and the ultimate degree of harm caused to the victim. The question often asked is such cases is "for which act does it seem fair and just to hold the actor accountable?" Consequences of an act which are not reasonably foreseeable to the actor are "intervening causes" and may serve to relieve the actor of criminal liability.
Proximate Cause: the legal principle that the criminal act is the one that is the most significant and it seems fair and just to hold the actor accountable for his or her actions.
Harm: the result of the act, the injury to another.
Strict Liability: Imposes accountability without proof of criminal intent in situations where society deems it fair to do so, such as violations of drug and alcohol sales laws.
Vicarious Liability: refers to the imputation of accountability from one person to another, usually the individual's superior.
Inchoate Crimes: crimes that occur in preparation for an offense. Inchoate means "to begin" or "to partially put into operation."
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Ch. 4 Federal and State Courts Discussion
According to the book some judges are elected in partisan elections. This means that the judges are aligned with a particular party and are accordingly elected on their alliance. This seems to defeat the point of impartiality when the judges are elected on their biases. This also seems to be an issue with the Supreme Court. The president, a politician, selects a candidate that benefits his political position. Mostly that means he selects a judge that is aligned with his political party inorder to gain more influence in the court for his political party. If there have been several presidents who were conservative and they had chances to select Supreme Court justices during their terms the Supreme Court would be an overwhelming effect. The effect would consist of a mostly conservative Supreme Court which might not be impartial. An example is that justice Alito is an extreme conservative and some of his comments lead one to believe that he has negative opinions about women. It is also interesting that about half the population is female and only two justices out of nine on the Supreme Court are women.
Humans by definition are not perfect. Judges are human and therefore cannot be expected to be completely impartial in their judgments or opinions. The fact that some are elected by political means just amplifies the division between impartiality and bias.
These are some judge political cartoons.
http://www.committeeforjustice.org/blog/uploaded_images/Fiesta-Cartoon-790746.jpg
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/s/k/2/Judge-Sotomayor.jpg
http://www.stus.com/images/products/cla173z.gif
http://www.mchumor.com/00images/2993_judge_cartoon.gif
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_1AuBdimNSBkzg91ItIn4qZC6G2Fd3dkrU_n2u91HqpjUqJe1MpOLQFqWCcdRMvI3kB5f-F4D6XIMROpTp4QZLI7q6ih8bo0w5n12H-ZlzuCTfWEJP8J_05-hwhdJsfAeHPkiWA3pshY/s400/1reached_retirement_age_judge_335845.jpg
Humans by definition are not perfect. Judges are human and therefore cannot be expected to be completely impartial in their judgments or opinions. The fact that some are elected by political means just amplifies the division between impartiality and bias.
These are some judge political cartoons.
http://www.committeeforjustice.org/blog/uploaded_images/Fiesta-Cartoon-790746.jpg
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/s/k/2/Judge-Sotomayor.jpg
http://www.stus.com/images/products/cla173z.gif
http://www.mchumor.com/00images/2993_judge_cartoon.gif
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_1AuBdimNSBkzg91ItIn4qZC6G2Fd3dkrU_n2u91HqpjUqJe1MpOLQFqWCcdRMvI3kB5f-F4D6XIMROpTp4QZLI7q6ih8bo0w5n12H-ZlzuCTfWEJP8J_05-hwhdJsfAeHPkiWA3pshY/s400/1reached_retirement_age_judge_335845.jpg
Friday, September 18, 2009
Ch. 4 Vocabulary
Jurisdiction: the legal authority or power of a court to hear, pronounce on, and decide a case.
1. Personal Jurisdiction: involves the authority of the court over the person.
2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction: involves the authority conferred on a court to hear a particular type of case.
3. Geographical Jurisdiction: the authority of courts to hear cases that arise within specified boundaries, such as a city, county, state, or country.
- Venue: the geographic location of the court according to Dr. Ball
4. Hierarchical Jurisdiction: involves the division of responsibilities and functions among the various courts.
- General Jurisdiction: means a court has the authority to hear a variety of cases, that it is not limited to hearing only only a particular type of case.
- Original Jurisdiction: means the power of the court to hear the case initially.
- Appellate Jurisdiction: the power of the court to review a decision of a lower court.
Article III Courts: the federal courts were established by Congress pursuant to its authority to create "inferior" or lower courts under Article III in the Constitution.
Diversity of Citizenship: the situation where the opposing parties are from different states.
En Banc: if there are conflicting decisions involving the same legal issue between two panels, the entire circuit may sit "as a group" and rehear the case.
Writ of Certiorari: an order to the lower courts to send the record of the case up to the Supreme Court.
Rule of Four: if four or more justices vote to accept a case, it is placed on the Court's docket.
Trial de Novo: is an entirely new trial not just a standard appeal that takes place in the lower court.
Felonies: crimes for which the possible punishment includes a sentence of imprisonment for at least one year.
Complaint: an accusation on a formal document that may be filed out by an officer or a private citizen accusing a specified person or persons of committing a specified act or acts.
Probable Cause: a legal concept referring to the amount of proof a police officer must have to search or arrest someone.
Booking: an administrative procedure, and it involves making an entry in the police blotter at the station indicating the suspect's name, arrest time, offense, and the taking of fingerprints and photographs.
Initial Appearance: the first court appearance that takes place in a municipal or justice of the peace court.
Preliminary Hearing: also called the preliminary examination. the magistrate determines if there is probable cause to believe that an offense was committed and if it was the defendant who committed the crime. it is a critical stage of the prosecution so a lawyer may be present.
Arraignment: a formal hearing before a felony court where defendants are again informed of the charges against them and advised of their rights.
Standing Mute: the defendant is refusing to plead his case and the court enters a not guilty plea.
Nolo Contendere: a no contest plea means the defendant accepts the punishment of the court but does not admit he committed the crime.
Alford Plea: the defendant enters a guilty plea but denies having committed the crime.
Venire: "to cause" or "make come", the legal term for summoning jurors.
Voir Dire: "to speak the truth", the process of questioning the jurors to determine if they have bias, prejudice, impartiality about the case.
Jury Consultants: experts hired by attorneys to help them determine what type of person is more likely to favor their side.
Challenge for cause: a valid reason for wanting to dismiss an individual is shown to the court's satisfaction.
Peremptory Challenge: there is no reason for a potential jurist to be dismissed. these are usually limited to a certain number.
Motion: a request made to the court asking it for something, such as a granting a continuance, the supression of evidence, or the dismissal of the case.
Habeas Corpus: "you have the body", an indirect appeal that challenges the authority of the court to incarcerate the defendant.
Partisan: aligned with a particular party. some states have partisan election of judges.
Retention: judge stands for election after having been selected by a non-partisan commission and then by the govenor of the state.
Innocent Until Executed: We have no right to exoneration
---------This is an article written by Dahlia Lithwick in the Newsweek magazine.
The article describes a man, Cameron Todd Willingham, who allegedly set a Texas house fire in 1991. The house fire killed his three young daughters. He was convicted of arson and sentenced to death. A reporter researched the case said that the "whole prosecution was a train wreck." He also said that "every step in the appeal, Willingham's claims of innocence were met with the response that he'd already had more than enough due process for a babykiller." There were at least five indepent investigations of the supposed arson case. Every single investigation came away with little doubt that it was accidental. The likely cause was a space heater or bad wiring. No one at the state Board of Pardons and Paroles or the govenor's office took note of these investigations or the reports that were sent out protesting Willingham's evidence. Willingham was executed in 2004. His reported last words were, "The most distressing thing is the state of Texas will kill an innocent man and doesn't care they're making a mistake."
The article also describes some Supreme Court ruling. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that a "prisoner did not have a constitutional right to demand DNA testing of evidence in police files, even at his own expense." Chief Justice John Roberts said that "A criminal defendent proved guilty after a fair trial does not have the same liberty interests as a free man."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/214833
The article describes a man, Cameron Todd Willingham, who allegedly set a Texas house fire in 1991. The house fire killed his three young daughters. He was convicted of arson and sentenced to death. A reporter researched the case said that the "whole prosecution was a train wreck." He also said that "every step in the appeal, Willingham's claims of innocence were met with the response that he'd already had more than enough due process for a babykiller." There were at least five indepent investigations of the supposed arson case. Every single investigation came away with little doubt that it was accidental. The likely cause was a space heater or bad wiring. No one at the state Board of Pardons and Paroles or the govenor's office took note of these investigations or the reports that were sent out protesting Willingham's evidence. Willingham was executed in 2004. His reported last words were, "The most distressing thing is the state of Texas will kill an innocent man and doesn't care they're making a mistake."
The article also describes some Supreme Court ruling. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that a "prisoner did not have a constitutional right to demand DNA testing of evidence in police files, even at his own expense." Chief Justice John Roberts said that "A criminal defendent proved guilty after a fair trial does not have the same liberty interests as a free man."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/214833
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Ch. 3 Making Law Disscussion
I don't like it that the government can take your property away from you. Eminent domain just bothers me. I found out that homes taken by the government are usually underapraised so that the homeowner is ripped off. I don't agree with the court decision in Kelo vs. City of New London. "Public use" is not equivalent to "public purpose," which is not equal to "economic purpose." That just seems like the government is favoring big businesses over the individual rights to live where they want. It also seems to more a conservative thing to do than a liberal thing. Here is an article that deals with two eminent domain cases with one landowner. I wonder why they had to relocate a road? I remember when the Idaho government took some property along Curtis road. Several houses were demolished. What I found disturbing about it was that they didn't use the space efficiently. The houses could still have been there now because there is that much room.
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/04/06/news/040709rznoland.txt
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/04/06/news/040709rznoland.txt
Friday, September 4, 2009
Ch. 3 Vocab
Common Law: a common law system was developed in England by the thirteenth century. Common law was judge-made law. That is, it was law created by judges as they heard cases and settled disputes. pg.373
Henry II: English king (1154-1189) of referred to as the "father of the common law." pg. 379
Ranulf de Ganvill: Henry II's chief justice, who wrote a book detailing the transition from substantive irrationality decision making to legal decision making in common law. pg. 386
Magna Carta: the "Great Charter" of 1215, limiting the power of the English sovereign and asserting certain rights on the part of the barons. pg. 382
Henry de Braction: English judge who compiled judicial rulings to show how precedent may guide future rulings; he is often referred to as the father of case law. pg. 379
Stare Decisis: the legal basis for adhering to precedent: "Let the decision stand." pg. 388
Ratio Decidendi: the legal principle on which a case is decided. pg. 386
William Blackstone: English judge and philosopher whose Commentaries on the Laws of England organized common law into the structure it has today. pg. 390
Obiter Dicta: statements in a court's decision made in support of the ratio decidendi but which do not establish precedent. pg. 383
Constitution: a document that legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology, provides a framework for the administration of government, regulates social and institutional behavior, and enumerates national goals and aspirations. pg. 374
Criminal Law: the body of law that regulates conduct and provides penalties (including fines and imprisonment) to be imposed on those who violate the laws; sometimes referred to as the criminal code or penal code. pg. 375
Articles of Confederation: the 1781 document that was the first attempt at creating a unified United States. pg. 372
Habeas Corpus: a document challenging the legality of a person's detention. pg. 379
Bills of Attainder: legislation imposing punishment without trial. pg.372
Ex Post Facto: criminalizing an act already completed but no previously forbidden by the penal law. pg. 377
Bill of Rights: the first 10 Ammendments to the U.S. Constitution. pg. 373
First Ammendment: Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abidging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. pg. 62. It states the principles of freedom of religion, press, speech, and assembly.
Second Ammendment: A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall no be infringed. pg. 63. It states that people have the right to defend themselves and own weapons.
Third Ammendment: No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in any time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. pg. 64. It states that the military can't force people to let them stay in people's homes.
Fourth Ammendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall no be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to seized. pg. 64. It says that the law enforcement or government can't search your home or seize your property without a warrant that was issued because of probable cause you did something against the law.
Fifth Ammendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual sevice in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. pg. 65.
Grand Jury: a group of citizens who listen to the case presented by a prosecutor and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to grant an indictment. pg. 379
Indictment: a document formally charging the defendant with a crime handed down by a grand jury after hearing the evidence presented by the prosecutor. pg. 380
Information: a substitute for an indictment in which charges against a defendant are filed directly with the court by the prosecutor, thus bypassing the grand jury. pg. 380
Double Jeopardy: the legal principle that states a jurisdiction may not (1) prosecute someone again for the same crime after the person ha s been acquitted, (2) prosecute someone again for the same crime after the person has been convicted, and (3) punish someone twice for the same offense. pg. 376
Mistrial: a situation in which a trial is terminated because of a legal error that occurs during a trial that unfairly prejudices the defendant. A new trial may be held at a later date. pg. 382
Hung Jury: a situation that occurs when the trial jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict in a case that requires unanimity. pg. 379
Acquittal: an acquittal or "not guilty" decision means that the state was unable to meet the high burden of proof necessary for a conviction. pg. 371
Dual Sovereignty Doctrine: under the dual sovereignty doctrine, a person can be prosecuted in both federal and state court for the same offense or in the courts of different states for the same offense if certain circumstances surrounding the offense occurred in more than one state. pg. 376 Miranda Warnings: warning given by police to arrested suspects, informing them of both the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel. Evidence obtained by the police during a custodial investigation of a suspect could not be used at trial unless the suspect first was informed of these rights. pg. 382
Eminent Domain: the right and power of government to take private property with just compensation, for public purposes. pg. 377
Sixth Ammendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. pg. 67.
Seventh Ammendment: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. pg. 68-69.
Eighth Ammendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. pg. 69
Ninth Ammendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The rights provided in the Bill of Rights should not be taken as the only rights that citizens have-they are merely some of the rights retained by the people. pg. 69
Tenth Ammendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the United States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. It states that the rights not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved for the states or individual citizens. pg. 70
Reconstruction Ammendments: Ammendments passed after the Civil War that were intended to protect the recently freed slaves. These Ammendments include the 13th, 14th, and 15th Ammendments. pg. 70
Thirteenth Ammendment: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. pg. 71
Fourteenth Ammendment: All persons born, or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. pg. 71
Suspect Classification: An unconstitutional distinction made between individuals on the basis of race, religion, or national origin in a law or policy. Means that the state cannot enact or enforce laws aimed at restricting the rights of so-called suspect classifications, which are groups of people who historically have been ill-treated. pg. 388
Fundamental Rights: Rights that the Supreme Court has determined are "essential to the concept of ordered liberty." pg. 378
Strict Scrutiny: A rigorous standard of review exercised by the courts for cases involving legislation curtailing fundamental rights or a suspect classification. pg. 388
Intermediate Scrutiny: A level of review developed by the Supreme Court to review governmental actions that may affect an individual's constitutional rights. The test is whether a law is "substantially related to an important government purpose." pg. 380
Rational Basis Test: A less restrictive basis for judicial review used when neither a fundamental right nor a suspect classification is implicated in enacted legislation. Legislation must have a rational basis. pg. 386
Substantive Due Process: A constitutional principle that holds that in addition to procedural rights the law must protect substantive rights, such as the right to possess or to say or do certain things. pg. 388
Incorporation: The Fourteenth Ammendment says that no state shall deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law", as prohibiting states from abridging certain individual rights. Many of these rights are are included in the Bill of Rights, hence these rights were included (or incorporated) in the definition of due process. pg. 75
Total Incorporation: Under the total incorporation approach, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Ammendment made the entire Bill of Rights applicable to the states. pg. 389
Total Incorporation Plus: Under the total incorporation plus approach, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Ammendment includes all of the Bill of Rights and, includes other rights not specified in it. pg. 389
Selective Incorporation: A piecemeal evolutionary approach to incorporation. pg. 387
Judicial Review: The power of the courts to examine a law to determine whether it is constitutional. pg. 381
Henry II: English king (1154-1189) of referred to as the "father of the common law." pg. 379
Ranulf de Ganvill: Henry II's chief justice, who wrote a book detailing the transition from substantive irrationality decision making to legal decision making in common law. pg. 386
Magna Carta: the "Great Charter" of 1215, limiting the power of the English sovereign and asserting certain rights on the part of the barons. pg. 382
Henry de Braction: English judge who compiled judicial rulings to show how precedent may guide future rulings; he is often referred to as the father of case law. pg. 379
Stare Decisis: the legal basis for adhering to precedent: "Let the decision stand." pg. 388
Ratio Decidendi: the legal principle on which a case is decided. pg. 386
William Blackstone: English judge and philosopher whose Commentaries on the Laws of England organized common law into the structure it has today. pg. 390
Obiter Dicta: statements in a court's decision made in support of the ratio decidendi but which do not establish precedent. pg. 383
Constitution: a document that legalizes the existing political order and legitimizes its ideology, provides a framework for the administration of government, regulates social and institutional behavior, and enumerates national goals and aspirations. pg. 374
Criminal Law: the body of law that regulates conduct and provides penalties (including fines and imprisonment) to be imposed on those who violate the laws; sometimes referred to as the criminal code or penal code. pg. 375
Articles of Confederation: the 1781 document that was the first attempt at creating a unified United States. pg. 372
Habeas Corpus: a document challenging the legality of a person's detention. pg. 379
Bills of Attainder: legislation imposing punishment without trial. pg.372
Ex Post Facto: criminalizing an act already completed but no previously forbidden by the penal law. pg. 377
Bill of Rights: the first 10 Ammendments to the U.S. Constitution. pg. 373
First Ammendment: Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abidging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. pg. 62. It states the principles of freedom of religion, press, speech, and assembly.
Second Ammendment: A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall no be infringed. pg. 63. It states that people have the right to defend themselves and own weapons.
Third Ammendment: No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in any time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. pg. 64. It states that the military can't force people to let them stay in people's homes.
Fourth Ammendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall no be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to seized. pg. 64. It says that the law enforcement or government can't search your home or seize your property without a warrant that was issued because of probable cause you did something against the law.
Fifth Ammendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual sevice in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. pg. 65.
Grand Jury: a group of citizens who listen to the case presented by a prosecutor and determine whether there is sufficient evidence to grant an indictment. pg. 379
Indictment: a document formally charging the defendant with a crime handed down by a grand jury after hearing the evidence presented by the prosecutor. pg. 380
Information: a substitute for an indictment in which charges against a defendant are filed directly with the court by the prosecutor, thus bypassing the grand jury. pg. 380
Double Jeopardy: the legal principle that states a jurisdiction may not (1) prosecute someone again for the same crime after the person ha s been acquitted, (2) prosecute someone again for the same crime after the person has been convicted, and (3) punish someone twice for the same offense. pg. 376
Mistrial: a situation in which a trial is terminated because of a legal error that occurs during a trial that unfairly prejudices the defendant. A new trial may be held at a later date. pg. 382
Hung Jury: a situation that occurs when the trial jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict in a case that requires unanimity. pg. 379
Acquittal: an acquittal or "not guilty" decision means that the state was unable to meet the high burden of proof necessary for a conviction. pg. 371
Dual Sovereignty Doctrine: under the dual sovereignty doctrine, a person can be prosecuted in both federal and state court for the same offense or in the courts of different states for the same offense if certain circumstances surrounding the offense occurred in more than one state. pg. 376 Miranda Warnings: warning given by police to arrested suspects, informing them of both the privilege against self-incrimination and the right to counsel. Evidence obtained by the police during a custodial investigation of a suspect could not be used at trial unless the suspect first was informed of these rights. pg. 382
Eminent Domain: the right and power of government to take private property with just compensation, for public purposes. pg. 377
Sixth Ammendment: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. pg. 67.
Seventh Ammendment: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. pg. 68-69.
Eighth Ammendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. pg. 69
Ninth Ammendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The rights provided in the Bill of Rights should not be taken as the only rights that citizens have-they are merely some of the rights retained by the people. pg. 69
Tenth Ammendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the United States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. It states that the rights not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved for the states or individual citizens. pg. 70
Reconstruction Ammendments: Ammendments passed after the Civil War that were intended to protect the recently freed slaves. These Ammendments include the 13th, 14th, and 15th Ammendments. pg. 70
Thirteenth Ammendment: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. pg. 71
Fourteenth Ammendment: All persons born, or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. pg. 71
Suspect Classification: An unconstitutional distinction made between individuals on the basis of race, religion, or national origin in a law or policy. Means that the state cannot enact or enforce laws aimed at restricting the rights of so-called suspect classifications, which are groups of people who historically have been ill-treated. pg. 388
Fundamental Rights: Rights that the Supreme Court has determined are "essential to the concept of ordered liberty." pg. 378
Strict Scrutiny: A rigorous standard of review exercised by the courts for cases involving legislation curtailing fundamental rights or a suspect classification. pg. 388
Intermediate Scrutiny: A level of review developed by the Supreme Court to review governmental actions that may affect an individual's constitutional rights. The test is whether a law is "substantially related to an important government purpose." pg. 380
Rational Basis Test: A less restrictive basis for judicial review used when neither a fundamental right nor a suspect classification is implicated in enacted legislation. Legislation must have a rational basis. pg. 386
Substantive Due Process: A constitutional principle that holds that in addition to procedural rights the law must protect substantive rights, such as the right to possess or to say or do certain things. pg. 388
Incorporation: The Fourteenth Ammendment says that no state shall deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law", as prohibiting states from abridging certain individual rights. Many of these rights are are included in the Bill of Rights, hence these rights were included (or incorporated) in the definition of due process. pg. 75
Total Incorporation: Under the total incorporation approach, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Ammendment made the entire Bill of Rights applicable to the states. pg. 389
Total Incorporation Plus: Under the total incorporation plus approach, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Ammendment includes all of the Bill of Rights and, includes other rights not specified in it. pg. 389
Selective Incorporation: A piecemeal evolutionary approach to incorporation. pg. 387
Judicial Review: The power of the courts to examine a law to determine whether it is constitutional. pg. 381
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
