Albert W. Florence, the petitioner in this case, was initially arrested in 1998 and charged with use of a deadly weapon and obstruction of justice (Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, Opinion, I). He pled guilty to two lesser counts and was ordered to make monthly payments to cover his fine. However, as stated in the Opinion of the Court, he did not keep up with his payments, and a warrant was issued for his arrest in 2003. Florence paid the rest of his fine only days later. However, when he and his wife were pulled over in Burlington County, New Jersey, in 2005, the state trooper’s computer system still had Florence’s warrant, so he arrested and transported him to Burlington County Detention Center. However, as noted in the majority opinion, the arrest itself was not the cause of the case. …show more content…
Board of Chosen Freeholders, Opinion, I). All parts of the body, including the mouth, underarms, and genitalia, were checked so as to discover any wounds, tattoos, or contraband. He was also required to shower using a soap with a delousing agent (to help guard against lice outbreaks) while being monitored by officers. After being held for 6 days in a cell, Florence was transferred to the Essex County Correctional Facility, which housed over 25,000 and approximately 1,000 gang members. In a similar manner at the Burlington County Detention Center, he and other incoming inmates went through metal detector and a strip search, as well as showered under surveillance. The day after being admitted to the jail, however, the charges against him were dropped, and he was
Criminal charges were, later, dismissed. It is unclear what role, if any, Defendant MOS Jose Peinan played in this
He was arrested in January for the murder while he was under the supervision of the Department of Corrections for a methamphetamine
On November 2, 1734 an arrest warrant was issued for John Peter Zenger on the account of him publicly publishing a libel and misrepresentation of the Governor in his New York Weekly Journals. In attendance of the issue of the warrant was the Governor William Cosby, Captain General and Governor in Chief, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Livingston, Chief Justice Delancey, Mr. Cortland, Mr, Horsmanden, and Mr. Lane. The warrant calls for the Sheriff of New York City to find and arrest Mr. Zenger. His reasoning in the warrant for arresting him is because it “tending to raise factions and tumults among the people of this Province, inflaming their minds with contempt of His Majesty’s government, and greatly disturbing the peace thereof” Essentially
On 01-02-2016 at 0200 hours I was dispatched to booking in reference to a subject with a warrant. Upon arrival I took custody of Jeremy Freeman, who dispatch advised had an active warrant through Poplar Bluff Municipal Court. Freeman was processed and lodged at the Butler County Justice Center awaiting bond. WARRANT INFORMATION: Agency: Poplar Bluff Municipal Warrant #:
As part of its strategy to enjoin the NAACP from operating, Alabama required it to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all the NAACP's members and agents in the state. The NAACP argued that this violated the due process clause of the 14th amendment. Verdict: Unanamous decision for the NAACP, majority opinion by John M. Harlan II. He said that “that a compelled disclosure of the NAACP's membership lists would have the effect of suppressing legal association among the group's members”.
Jerry Douglas Mempa pleaded guilty to joyriding, and had been placed on probation for two years and the imposition of his sentence was deferred. Four months later, the county prosecutor moved to withdraw Mempa’s probation based on his participation in a burglary (Oyez,2017). Mempa petitioned the Washington Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus and claimed that he was denied his right to counsel during the proceedings revoking his probation. The Washington Supreme Court denied his petition. Counsel also assists the defendant in asserting his rights, such as the right to appeal, at the deferred sentencing stage
Auburn Police Records department checked Oleg 's criminal history for prior order violations and it showed Oleg had two guilty convictions for order violations. Because Oleg had two guilty convictions for order violations, there was probable cause to arrest Oleg for Felony Violation of a DV Protection Order. I completed a Superform for Oleg. I included the form in the case jacket, copied it to the V:drive and faxed a copy to SCORE jail. Officer Lewis transported Oleg to SCORE jail to be
However, since Giles admitted to his crimes he was put
The District of Columbia courts needs to waive and remit before he is able to be tried. At this time there was a motion filed to have him receive the case waived. The judge filed for a ‘full investigation’, which lead to Kent’s case being waived from the juvenile courts. He was then tried in the District Court. The jury found Kent guilty of six counts of housebreaking and robbery.
He was then captured and put into the San Francisco jail and was put on trial
In my first case, I will analyze the Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. In this case, in a 5-4 decision, the Court overrules its decision in United States v. Miller, in which, it stated that the Second Amendment only protects the right to keep and bear arms in relation with service in a well-regulated, government sponsored militia. In the majority opinion of Heller, Scalia divides the Second Amendment into two parts: the prefatory clause and the operative clause. The prefatory clause is the first half of the Second Amendment, it reads: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” while the operative clause is the second half of the Amendment: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
They were in jail for 23 days until the bail amount came to a affordable amount. During his time in jail Johnson had learned his skills and made friends with
Parties: United States of America (Plaintiff) v. Ann W. McRee and Joseph H. Hale (Defendants) Facts: In the case of the United States (Plaintiff) verses Ann W. McRee and Joseph H Hale (Defendants), the defendants were convicted in District Court in Northern Georgia. They were guilty of converting government property based on cashing and disbursement of erroneously issued refund checks, which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. & 371. The Defendants were also charge with five counts of engaged in the interstate transportation fraudulently, violation of 18 U.S.C. & 2314, and one count of converted United States property which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. &641. They were found guilty on all counts.
Case: New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) Facts: A high school freshman (T.L.O) had her purse searched by the Assistant Vice Principal at her school because a teacher found her and another student smoking in the lavatory. The Assistant Vice Principal uncovered cigarettes and marijuana. Procedural history: T.L.O. motioned to suppress the evidence because her Fourth Amendment rights were violated and was denied by the Juvenile Court stating the search was reasonable. The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court agreed there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the decision stating the search was unreasonable.
This ruling is controversial because many say that this will let guilty people go free on police carelessness, while others say that the constitution is not a technicality and allows for the equal prosecution of all