Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Family law case analysis
Family law case analysis
Family law case analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
At age twelve, Samuel Winship was arrested and charged as a juvenile delinquent for breaking into a woman's locker and stealing $112 from her pocketbook. The charge also alleged that had Winship's act been done by an adult, it would constitute larceny. Relying on Section 744(b) of the New York Family Court Act, which provided that determinations of juvenile's guilt be based on a preponderance of the evidence, a Family Court found Winship guilty, despite acknowledging that the evidence did not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Winship's appeal of the court's use of the lower "preponderance of the evidence" burden of proof, was rejected in both the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court and in the New York Court of Appeals
The Court ruled for the juvenile, stating that his rights to due process were indeed violated according to the Fourteenth Amendment. “The proceedings of the Juvenile Court failed to comply with the Constitution. The Court held that the proceedings for juveniles had to comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment” (Oyez, n.d.). The Court analyzed the juvenile court's method of handling cases, verifying that, while there are good reasons behind handling juveniles in a different way from adults, adolescents seeking to settling delinquency and detainment cases are qualified for certain procedural safeguards under the Due Process Act of the Fourteenth
Returning to the judicial world of the Bronx Family Court as a judge, after years of working in administration, Judge Richard Ross is astonished to find a distinctly more disjointed situation than the one he left. As he attempts to live out his life as “both the fact finder and arbiter of the law” it is clear the current judicial system does not serve him well (xv). Judge Ross conveys to the reader the fundamental issues of the Family Court system through his day to day happenings which range from endless caseloads to death threats. The use of personal experience is effective in adding credibility to more clearly convey his point that not only the Judges, but the case workers, 18-B attorneys, and various legal aides are overworked to a point
The book basically talks about two young boys both with the name Wes Moore, who grew up in Baltimore and in the same neighborhood but never knew of each others existence. This is until the author Wes Moore, the one who escaped his rough childhood in Baltimore and the Bronx, began meeting with the other Wes Moore and questioning him who is spending his life in prison because of attempted murder. The author Wes Moore who managed to escape his situation growing up had a much more supportive mother who moved him away from Baltimore and continued to push him to get an education. He lived in the Bronx for sometime with his grandparents and mother, and attended a well renowned school in the Bronx. His mother worked several jobs in order for him to
A 12 year old stole money from a lady’s wallet that was stored in a locker at the time it was taken. Samuel Winship, the defendant was charged with an act of delinquency. If Samuel was charged as an adult the crime would have be larceny. A New York Family court judge convicted Samuel on a preponderance of evidence, which at the time was all that was necessary according to New York State Statute. At the time of the trial a juvenile in the state of New York was at least seven years old, but younger than 16. Samuel was 12, which by law made him a juvenile that could be charged with an act of delinquency.
At the time of the murder of which David Milgaard was accused of committing he was just 16 years old. He was a hippie, constantly in trouble. Even before he was a teenager he was getting into trouble. His parents and teachers considered him impulsive; he resisted authority (Regina Leader Post, 1992, as cited in Anderson & Anderson 1998). He was removed from kindergarten because he was considered to be a negative influence on the other children. When he was thirteen he spent time in a psychiatric centre (Anderson & Anderson, 1998)
There are many differences when it comes to gender within the trial of Thomas and Jane Weir. Women were usually domestic workers within the household and society, doing jobs such as child-rearing, weaving, and roles of mother, sister, daughter, wife and caretaker in the community. Men were either seen as the husbands of the female witchcraft users or someone of an intense authority figure. “Sir Andrew Ramsay, Lord Abbotshall then Provost of Edinburgh” were all men with high statuses within the community in Edinburgh in which Thomas lived. Women during the time of witchcraft in Scotland came to be connected with the Devil by possession while most men do not have carnal knowledge of the work of the Devil himself
James Henry Hammond was born in South Carolina on November 15th, 1807 and died on November 13th, 1864. Not only was Hammond a very wealthy plantation owner, but he was also a very successful politician. From 1835 to 1836, he served as a United States Representative. He also served as South Carolina’s Governor from 1842 to 1844. In his later years, he served as United States Senator from 1857 to 1860.
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
The use of juvenile records in adult criminal cases has been an ongoing, contested debate for many years. The effects of using one’s juvenile record in criminal court could be very damning. This week’s case summary is in regard to this very issue. In People v. Smith (1991), the defendant in this case, Ricky Smith stated that he was wrongly sentenced to the maximum length of 180 months under a statute which utilized his juvenile record to deem that he was a habitual offender. A closer examination follows.
“…and on the charge that the prisoner did with others to conspire to destroy the lives of soldiers in the military service of the United States in violation of the laws and customs of war-Guilty” were the words that soared out of Wallace’s mouth at the end of the trial. It was then that Henry Wirz was found guilty. Why? Why was he found guilty? This decision was based on the emotional aspect of the witnesses, and not by the actual guilt. Not only my defense, but also the defense of Wirz’s attorney, Baker, the testimony of the defendant, Henry Wirz, shows that Wirz should not have been found guilty.
Kris Young was 25 when he was brought before the court on charges of theft. Kris was alleged to have tried to walk out of City Wear, a popular clothing store in Jurisville, without paying for a leather jacket costing $600. When stopped by the store manager, he tried to run away but was overpowered and handed over to the officers from JPD.Unable to make bail, Kris remained in custody for 60 days during which he pleaded guilty to theft. Based on the plea and the circumstances of the case, the judge sentenced Kris to a year in prison. Later the sentence was suspended and Kris was ordered to be under probation. The probation officer was asked to report back to the court after 3 months.
For three hours and a half in a courtroom at Boise, Ohio, Harry Orchard assembled in the witness chair at the Haywood trial and recounted a record of offenses, slaughter, and murder… the like of which no individual in the overcrowded courtroom had ever thought of. Not in the entire scope of "Bloody Gulch" literature will there be exposed anything that approaches an equivalent to the atrocious narrative so motionlessly, coolly, and composedly voiced by this audacious, disimpassioned man-slaughterer.
Analysis of The Hanged Man's Bride, The Trial for Murder and Confession Found in a Prison
In "a view from the Bridge", justice and law are not presented as being synonymous.
This trial, without going into the particular details of it could be summarised as it follows: