Donald Marshall Case Analysis

Michael Blair was convicted of kidnapping and strangling a young girl named Ashley Estell. Ashley was only seven years old when she disappeared from the park her and her family were attending. The state had three eyewitnesses, but none claimed to have seen Estell and Blair together at the Plano, Texas park. The disappearance occurred on September 4, 1993 and Michael Blair’s car was spotted by both police and city employees before he was called in for questioning which eventually lead to his conviction in 1994. There were many different reasons Michael Blair was wrongly convicted of the young girls death.

Litigant Henry Xavier Kennedy claims the liable decision in a jury trial for the wrongdoing of first degree fire related crime in the September 23, 1981 flame which leveled his log lodge. He guarantees that the jury charges, or now and again called directions to the jury by the judge, were mistaken in a few distinct ways and that there was insufficient proof to convict him of the charge. Kennedy 's building business was moderate, and he had two home loans on the lodge which was the building being referred to. He had restored a protection approach on the building for $40,000 days prior. Kennedy had told agents that he had a strong plausible excuse from 12:00 midnight until 4:00 a.m. which would dispose of him from any wrongdoing since he was

Legal Citation of the Case R v Lopez [2014] NSWSC 287 (21 March 2014) Overview Carlos Lopez has been found not guilty of the murder his mother, stepfather and brother by reason of mental illness. He was also found not guilty of the two counts of animal cruelty, causing death, against the family’s pet Chihuahuas.

Yesterday, Sloan Jackson, age 18 was put on trial for stealing a shirt from Famous Fashions in Merchandise Mall. He supposedly ran out of the store with a lump (which was the same color as the stolen shirt) in his jacket to go to Record Mart because there was a big sale going on. He then was found sitting next to the yogurt stand and the shirt was found in a trash barrel near the yogurt stand. He then ran away from the security guard but he was in the end caught and brought back to the store to return the shirt. At the trial yesterday the jury came to a verdict of being guilty after talking in the jury room for about 10 minutes.

 Case Assessment  Click on the link below to view my case assessment in Word Format  Personal View :)  I believe that Lindy was innocent from the start. If proper forensic tests were performed then the jury probably would of arrived at this decision as well.

Every action she took showed that” (10). Throughout the entire investigation, the evidence was all there but the way it was presented in trial and the way the defense attacked it added a lot of doubt into the jury’s mind and that is what caused them to deliver the not guilty verdict. This case is considered a controversial case. There are a few factors that causes it to be considered controversial.

Smallwood v. State 680 A.2d 512 (MD. 1996) Procedural History: Dwight Ralph Smallwood, the defendant, was charged for rape in the first-degree, robbery with a deadly weapon, reckless endangerment, and assault with intent to murder. The defendant was also charged on a separate indictment for attempted murder in the second degree to his three victims each. The defendant pled guilty on October 11, 1994 to the charges of rape in the first-degree and robbery with a deadly weapon in the Prince George's County's Circuit Court. The circuit court had convicted the defendant to the charges of assault with intent to murder, all three counts of second-degree murder and reckless endangerment. The second-degree murder charges were based on his attack on

The jury was shown videos of more normal times for the family, when things seemed to be going well. Expert testimony also played a role in the outcome of the first trial. The evidence presented in this case was able to help the jury come to a decision when determining Mrs. Yates final

Richard miles was wrongfully convicted of murder and attempted murder in 1995 based on eyewitness testimony, false or misleading forensic evidence and official misconduct. The evidence presented at his trial that is useful for this particular research paper is the eyewitness testimony. Thurman the witness in this case identified Miles as the gunman from a photospread that police had given him. Several other witnesses were shown the same photospread but could not identify Miles. Miles was charged with murder and attempted murder.

Although she ended up spending months in jail, the arguments against her conviction on the legal terms of a change in jury member were not only heard out, but accepted, resulting in her freedom. (122). Although she faced unideal consequences under the law, as the jail time and fear of execution were certainly detrimental, they were far less severe than those that would have been expected. Compared to other women accused in other areas, Disborough’s legal consequences were notably light. She did, however, face more harsh consequences from her peers and fellow citizens.

After a year in office as Secretary of State, John Marshall became the fourth, and the longest serving, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the United States. Between 1801 and 1835, Chief Justice John Marshall dominated in the refinement of the nation’s legal structure. In his 34 year term as Chief Justice, Marshall most significantly bolstered the vision that the judicial branch of government had supremacy over all federal courts; however, before Marshall carried out this idea, the judiciary was not its own branch of government. Along with creating a separate branch of government, Marshall very heavily defined the roles of the Supreme Court and Congress through various decision papers. He also provided opinions which helped lay the constitutional

This is the date when they went to the biggest court of them all, The United States Supreme Court. This was their make it or break it moment. If the court ruled with Alabama they would be executed. If the court ruled with Powell then it would grant all the boys a retrial. The argument for Alabama which was stated in the court documents was this, “The right to legal counsel as stated in the 6th Amendment applies only to federal courts.

Additionally, the media got into the investigation by asking questions about the events before the murder. The National Enquirer, for instance, took a different angle to investigate the case; however, by doing this, the media almost made it impossible for proper investigations to be held by the criminal justice system. Ogletree Jr. maintains that the press failed terribly by trying to assume what the lawyers or witnesses thought at different times of the trial, which was a fail (Ogletree). Consequently, there should be a level of protection from the media. Public figures should not have their cases aired or followed to prevent tampering of evidence or misconceptions.

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.

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is