Caption: Brumfield v. Cain, 576 U. S. ____ (2015). In this case, Brumfield, the petitioner, wants the United States Supreme Court to review a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. Facts: Kevan Brumfield was convicted of murder of Betty Smothers, and was sentenced to death by a Louisiana court. This court decision was made before ruling that the 8th Amendment prohibits execution of the intellectually disabled under Atkins v. Virginia. Using the Atkins Mandate, in State v. Williams (2001), the Louisiana Supreme Court decided a hearing must take place to decide if Williams was actually intellectually disabled. He would have to prove this by showing (1) he has sub average intelligence as measured by a standardized IQ test and (2) significant impairment in several areas of adaptive skills (3) Manifestations of this neuro-psychological disorder in the developmental stage. In effort to prove his disability, Brumfield used Dr. Guin, a social worker, and Dr. Bolter, a neuropsychologist that performed a number of cognitive examinations on him. Procedural History: After the Williams decision, Brumfield amended his post-conviction petition to raise an Atkins claim, in which the Louisiana …show more content…
In addition, Brumfield’s low IQ scores, considering IQ tests margin of error, is enough to question his intellectual capacity as reasonable doubt and win his Atkins hearing. As far as the 5th Circuit claiming that the state court was not in violation of his rights because they initially did not provide him funds to make his case, is of no importance since the state court had acknowledged their mistake. After given the funds to show proper evidence Brumfield was indeed shown to be
The second clause of the intellectual disabilities standard regards to the conceptional skills of daily life. The three areas noted by the CCA to make a diagnosis are conceptual, social, and practical skills. The petitioner, Bobby James Moore’s accusation is that the CCA used his deficits against his strengths. During evaluations the defendant’s deficits and strengths are both considered to establish if the defendant has limitations or not. Because the petitioner’s claim that Atkins needs legal determinations rather than a medical diagnosis, there is no need to discuss the Moore’s strengths.
Name of the case: Babbitt V. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Citation: 515 US 687 (1995) Parties and their roles: BRUCE BABBITT, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, et al., PETITIONERS v. SWEET HOME CHAPTER OF COMMUNITIES FOR A GREAT OREGON et al. Facts: The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) makes it unlawful for any person to “take” endangered or threatened species, and defines “take” to mean, among other things, “harass, harm, pursue, wound, or kill.” In 1975, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) issued a regulation defining harm to include “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife.” Issues: Does
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
1927 U.S. Supreme Court case of Buck v. Bell The case of Buck v. Bell was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927. It involved a young woman, Carrie Buck, who was diagnosed as being feeble minded and instituted to the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble Minded. Carrie Buck was born on July 02, 1906 to Emma Harlowe Buck, who had Carrie out of wed lock. Back then, it was considered wrong to have a child out of wed lock. Therefore, Emma was deemed Feeble Minded and committed to the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble Minded.
In Roper v. Simmons there are two issues that must be addressed, the first being the issue of moral maturity and culpability. The defense in the trial phase of this case argued that Mr. Simmons was an at an age where he was not responsible enough to fully understand the effects and consequences of his actions. The majority draws on Atkins v. Virginia to argue that this specific precedent supports their case that the death penalty should not be imposed on the mentally immature or impaired. However, an important point to be made is that the Atkins v. Virginia decision is geared towards the clinical definition of mental retardation: significant limitations that limit adaptive skills. Also, another important question to consider is the competency and premeditation of Mr. Simmons’ crime in this case.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are here because one person in this courtroom decided to take law into her own hands. The defendant, Mrs. Dominique Stephens, murdered the man that she vowed to love. This sole act by the defendant is violation of all morals and her husband’s right to live. Afterwards, she even felt guilty about this violation of justice and called the cops on herself, and she later signed a written statement stating that she is guilty of the murder of Mr. Donovan Stephens. Then the defendant later recanted this statement and said that she only killed Mr. Stephens in self defense.
He says “the state has not produced one iota of medical evidence.” This makes the jury think about how valid
Yasmin Hassan DUE WEEK OF SEPT 22. POLSC 110 Prof. Newton FEDERALISM Logic of American Politics: “Federalism” 1. Explain the Supreme Court’s decisions in McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden and what these decisions would mean for federal-state relations. How would these early cases enable an expanded role for the national government years after these cases were heard?
Although many may argue that the accusations presented by the plaintiffs seemed quite plausible, further investigation proved many such claims to be false. For example, although Price and Bates accused the young African-American men of raping them on the freight train, “the Scottsboro doctor who examined the girls less than two hours after the alleged rapes […] was able to show on cross examination that the girls were both calm, composed, and free of bleeding and vaginal damage” (Linder). The fact that a certified doctor was able to prove that the young women were virtually unhurt after the supposed rapes shows that the girls were lying to the court. Although their claims made sense to the prejudiced judicial system, Price and Bates were simply using their positions in society as young white women to gain unwarranted sympathy from the all-white jury. Because scientific evidence was able to contradict the prosecution’s allegations, it was evident that false accusations were being made by the plaintiffs.
It confirms the already assumed. During the court trial, Dr. Jones was asked “From your conversations and examination of Perry Edward Smith, do you have an opinion as to whether he knew right from wrong at the time of the offense involved in this action?” (296). The doctor replies with a simple no. I strongly disagree what the doctor decides to reply. He claims he has no opinion because of Perry having no opinion.
In the novel To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee the term mockingbird symbolizes innocence in a person. In the novel it focuses on the fact that innocence, represented by the mockingbird, can be wrongfully harmed. There are two characters: Tom Robinson and Arthur “Boo” Radley that are supposed to represent the mockingbird. In the novel, Tom Robinson is the best example of a mockingbird because he is prosecuted for a crime he did not commit. Also, he was judged unfairly based on the color of his skin in his trial.
In 1945, the High Court of Australia heard the case of Gratwick v Johnson and ultimately decided to dismiss the appeal in a unanimous decision by the Judges. While different reasoning was employed, all five judges drew the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed as the statute the defendant was charged under was inconsistent with s.92 of the Australian Constitution. To provide some context for this case in 1944, Dulcie Johnson was charged with an offence against the National Security Act 1939-1943 in that she did contravene par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order by travelling from South Australia to Western Australia by rail. In brief terms par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order provided that no person shall, without a valid permit, travel from state to state or territory.
Clarence Darrow came to defend scopes. he had a agnostic view on religion and believe evolution is a important to know about. on the state 's side was William Bryan and christian who believed the bible should be thought of in a literal sense and evolution was a dangerous and would lead to a social movement. Just by knowing this it should have been a mistrial based on the fact that the state attorney 's main argument was that it goes against the literal interpretation of the bible because it 's obviously mixing church and state. Just to show you how silly this argument is heres some quotes from the bible Leviticus 19:27 states: “Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard”.
Name: Patel Mukeshkumar Paper # JANET M. TURNER, Appellant v. HERSHEY CHOCOLATE USA Word Count: _______ I. Citation: Turner v. Hershey Chocolate USA, 440 F.3d 604 [3d Cir. 2006] II. Issue and Rule: The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s disability claim. The appellant’s essential accommodation claim went to trial, but court excluded evidence regarding disability.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).