Kennedy vs. State of Georgia Kennedy v State of Georgia 172 Ga. App. 336 S.E.2d. 169 (1984) Facts Appellant Henry Xavier Kennedy was charged with first degree arson in September 23, 1981. He appealed this case stating that there was not enough evidence for the jury to convict him. The building that he was found guilty of burning down was his own home, he had two mortgages out on his home and just renewed a home owners insurance policy five days prior to the cabin being burnt down that was a total of forty thousand dollars. Kennedy states that he has an alibi from midnight until four a.m. where his house was on fire and he was not present at his home at the time of the fire, also some of his personal effects and a stove where removed prior of the fire. While investigating the start of the fire they discovered kerosene was found on the floor of many of the rooms, also that there was kerosene poured around the hot plate and it was left on. With all of this information from the investigation the police did and the information from the fire investigator gave them all the evidence to arrest Henry Kennedy for arson. Issues There was an issue with if the alibi was solid alibi, and also if he was actually able to be at the site when …show more content…
It may be your car, home, business but they are still unlawfully coming onto a property that is not theirs. They have many differences. Burglary is not just based on theft, you could be charged with murder while you were committing the burglary and also it includes that you are breaking into any type of structure. It does not just include a home or business. Breaking and entering is entering a building or vehicle; it does not mean that you are there to commit a theft only that you are breaking into something that is not yours. And last a home invasion is invading someone’s home and attempting to commit a crime like theft or
Facts of the Case: (Approximately 200 words) The case to place on March 2, 1801, when William Marbury was designated as a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia. Marbury and several others were appointed to government post created by Congrees during the end of John Adam’s term as President. President John Adams named forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia under the Organic Act. The Organic Act was an attempt by the Federalists to take control of the federal judiciary before Thomas Jefferson took office.
Kentucky v. King 1 Audelio Camacho Professor Alva AJ 180 3-27-17 Kentucky v. King The Supreme Court Case of Kentucky v. King occurred on October 2005, when Police officers in Lexington, Kentucky did a “buy bust operation in which a confidential informant attempted to buy crack cocaine from a suspected drug dealer.” The undercover was police officer Gibbons. When officer Gibbons gave the signal that the transaction was completed, the police approached the scene with their marked police cars. Once they were close to the suspect, Officer Gibbons radioed in a description of the suspect and said that King had gone through a specific hallway at a apartment complex. As the officers got to the hallway, a door was shut closed and the officers smelled
Herbert Landry was convicted of first-degree aggravated arson on August 16th, 2006 in Provo, Utah. Based on people who testified against him as well as the dog handler, Landry was initially found guilty of aggravated arson. Prior to conviction, Landry had been displaced from his home in New Orleans from Hurricane Katrina. Since the hurricane, Landry then moved to Shadow Woods Apartment complex; where the fire was taken place. Landry sent his family to Texas while he lived in Utah.
Korematsu v. United States After the United States entered World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066. Fred Korematsu was a natural born citizen to Japanese immigrant parents. Korematsu refused to obey the curfew and was charged and convicted of violating order 9066. He appealed this conviction and the Supreme Court took his case.
In Brandenburg v. Ohio, in 1969, problems arose when Brandenburg, a leader of a Klu Klux Klan, held a KKK meeting in an Ohio farm. In the convention Brandenburg was filmed as he complained about the United States suppressing the white race. For the most part the film was inaudible but it was certain that Brandenburg had stated some demeaning opinions on African Americans and Jews. In the assembly some Klu Klux Klan members were holding weapons. Though Brandenburg was not, he made it clear that violence would not take place unless it was necessary.
In 1857 the Supreme Court overruled a previous decision by the circuit court of St. Louis County, Missouri. The Case of Dred Scott versus John F. A. Sandford would go down in history as one of the courts most erroneous rulings. This verdict called into question a slaves rights in free states, popular sovereignty and the legality of the Missouri Compromise. Dred Scott had won a previous court battle over his former master John Sandford claiming that he had assaulted his wife and children and that he should in fact be a free man because he had been moved to Illinois and Wisconsin for a time. Since both were free territories he should in fact be free.
Terry v. Ohio was not much of a controversial case to many but I believe that John Terry had been wrongly accused and his right were protected by the 4th amendment that mentions unreasonable search and seizure. In 1968 detective Mcfadden had been observing 3 men that he believed were involved in robbing a bank. He proceeded to stop the men and pat them down (already violating the men's rights protected in the 4th amendment). Terry was one of the two men that was found with a concealed carry. The justices voted on the case 8-1 in the favor of the state of Ohio.
Heading: - Strickland v. Washington 466 US 668 (1984) II. Facts & Procedural History - In September 1976, during the course of ten days, the respondent, Strickland, planned and committed three groups of crimes, including three brutal stabbing murders, torture, kidnapping, severe assaults, attempted murders, attempted extortion, and theft. His two accomplices were arrested, and the respondent surrendered to police.
In reviewing the Supreme Court case of Roper v. Simmons 543 U.S. 551 (2005), we review the allegation of the violation of the Eighth Amendment in the trial court’s use of cruel and unusual punishment in its sentencing of Christopher Simmons; who was a juvenile at the time of the crime; to a sentence of death. In reviewing the facts of the case, we find that Christopher Simmons, then 17 and a junior in high school, along with Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer, planned the commission of a burglary with the intent to commit murder under the perception that they were minors and as such would be able to get away with the crimes. Upon his capture, Simmons, admitted to the crimes and provided law enforcement with the details of the crimes. Because of his age and the nature of the crime, Simmons was considered to be
In the case of a character breaking into another’s home there are two. In “Goldilocks and the Three Bears”, a young girl named Goldilocks, steals into three bear’s humble abode and pillages their possessions. A similar occurrence in “Where the Lilies Bloom”, is when Mary Call and her sibling intrude upon Kiser Pease’s, the children’s landlord, house when they learn that he is deathly ill. “Let’s just step inside a minute, Romey.”
United States v. Lopez was the first United States Supreme Court case since the New Deal to set limits to Congress's power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The issue of the case was that It exceeded to the power of Congress which had no say over it because the case had nothing to do with commerce or any sort of economic activity. The case United States v. Lopez involved Alfonzo Lopez Jr., Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist, and Congress. Unites States v. Lopez was about a 12th grader named
Anthony Graves A man who served eighteen long inequitable years behind bars for something he never did. Raised in Brenham Texas, a man who has never been in trouble his whole life until he was falsely accused. Anthony Graves, is the 38th exonerated death row inmate in America. He was arrested when he was 26 years old, wrongfully convicted, and spent over a decade before being let free.
Supreme Court cases can shape our national laws; it can shape an American citizen’s future. Without them, the Bill of Rights could be left up for our own interpretation. This could cause unfair laws and create havoc. In 1966, a court case named Kent vs United Sates took place. This case could create the ability to shape a juvenile's life forever.
Lots of people, especially in poor communities, have participated in stealing something. Regardless of what it is, we don’t know why. That’s the problem. We are so quick to judge people about what they’ve done, but we don’t even know why they did it. Maybe they had a good reason.
When children shoplift, they frequently feel entitled to what they are stealing. This idea is because they realize that many children their age possess what they want and so they steal the item so that they can own it. Shoplifting is incorrect because it is illegal and puts children at risk of being arrested and prosecuted. If a child is caught stealing, the parents should give impactful consequences to the child for their behavior. Shoplifting is usually not out of anger or aggression; it is out of peer pressure and wanting something that others have.