People V. Smith Case Analysis

United States v. Clemons Parties: The United States of America(Plaintiff) v. Eugene Milton Clemons and Dedrick Germond Smith(Defendants) Facts: In the case of Eugene Milton and Dedrick Smith verses the United State, the defendants are charged with murdering George Douglas Althouse. George Althouse was a Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration(DEA).

In the article,” The Steep Costs of Keeping Juveniles in Adult Prisons,” author Jessica Lahey subsequently claims, “ Juveniles constitute 1,200 of the 1.5 million people housed in federal and state prisons in this country, and nearly 200,000 youths enter the adult criminal-justice system each year, most for non-violent crimes. On any given day, 10,000 juveniles are housed in adults prisons and jails.” Reluctantly, juveniles are not given the opportunity in these circumstances to plead for their background story, nor do they receive the opportunity to engage towards their future. As the arguments began to rise throughout the years, the percentage on juveniles being tried as adults has also rose resulting in a more repetitive solution for these

The judge did not feel as though this sentence would be a wise one for this particular case. S.K the teenager in charge of the wheel ended up a quadriplegic, though unintentional the sacrifice of his limbs as well as 25 years off of his life, is what saved him from facing a harsh prison sentence. The judge decided that S.K would not live if he were to stay in a jail, due to his current physical situation. S.K required 24-7 medical attention. These services Justice Sonosa felt could not be provided, at the rehabilitation facility that S.K was supposed to attend, hence his final decision.

During this time frame, the accused had no direct supervision of the parolee. The defendants were not appreciative of any danger the parolee Mr. Vanda posed to the community or to the decedent. Were the actions of the board so direct account of his carelessness release of Mr. Vanda that it assumes the state action as required to state a claim under section 1983? I surmise that the incontestable facts fail to establish the necessary state

Ricky Franklin Smith was charged (as an adult) with breaking and entering a building with intents to commit larceny. Smith acknowledged that he had broken a window of a warehouse Pontiac, entered the building, and removed property without permission. Therefore Smith was sentenced to three and one-half to ten years for breaking and entering as a first time offender. But that sentence was vacated and Smith was sentenced to serve six to thirty years as a habitual offender (this was his fourth offense). Smith filed an appeal for improper sentencing because he cited that presentencing court judge used his juvenile record to characterize him as a “habitual offender” and a “danger to society”.

It was Ricky Franklin Smith fourth offense, in which he was known as a habitual offender. He pleaded guilty to a charge of breaking and entering. During his hearing in the Court of Appeals, Smith suggested that he deserve a resentence due to the fact his charges was base upon his expunged juvenile criminal record. The Court of Appeals referred back to the case in People v. Price, 172 Mich App 396, 399-400; 431 NW2d 524 (1988) that suggested that in pursuant to MCR 5.913 when a juvenile record is expunged it cannot be used in a sentencing. Whereas, People v. Jones 173 Mich App 341, 343;433 NW2d 829 (1988) states that an expunged juvenile record can be included in an investigation report and in a sentencing(People v. Smith, 2017).

Holmes County Assistant Prosecutor F. Christopher Oehl said he did not oppose concurrent sentences only because a guilty plea resulted in more efficient use of county resources, not because Schrock should receive some sort of credit for being similarly motivated in each of the crimes. Thumbing through pages outlining Schrock 's criminal history, Judge Robert Rinfret said, “To be perfectly frank, your record is truly one of the worst I 've seen in my life. It goes on for pages.” Reading through a list of criminal convictions for a variety of property, drug and personal crimes in several Ohio counties, as well as Florida and Washington, Rinfret commented on a seemingly endless pattern of criminal behavior spanning decades.

Kids were put in juvenile for the most simplest minor offenses. Offenses such as arguing and disrespecting adults to getting into school fights. These little incidents were so minor and could had been resolved easily, yet teens got prison time for minor crimes. According to William Ecenbarger in his book Kids For Cash, he writes about the many different offenses that kids got into and how they were punished and treated for their minor offenses and put into juvenile, and how Judge Mark Ciavarella took advantage of this. Cases like a fifteen year old boy who gets charged for a misdemeanor for showing disrespect to his grandfather and being placed on probation.

He appealed his conviction and sentence to the Fourth District Court of Appeal and they affirmed that the Act does not violate any constitutionality challenged the defendant. Facts 1. The defendant committed to serve time for certain crimes and he was prison released in August 1996. 2.

The decision to try a juvenile as an adult varies drastically across the globe as each country or state has its own set of laws and principles regarding the approach taken to juveniles in the court system that differ from those of other countries (Juvenile Vs Adult). In countries like India and France, there are sometimes entirely separate courts (France’s being called Juvenile Assize) and certain amendments that allow for those aged 16-18 who have committed “heinous” offenses to be tried as adults (Singhl). Places such as Iran and the Middle East try everyone as though they are the same, so minors can receive equal trials and sentences as adults (Mostafaei). Considering there is a range of policy and court differences, and for the purposes

I selected two cases this week to help debate the use of rehabilitation. Several case studies have shown that young homicide offenders tend to come from broken homes and violent families, have experienced parental alcoholism and child abuse, have low school achievement, and have run away from home or troubles in school. I believe cases that involve children or history of abuse may under proper screening and analysis be amenable by rehabilitation. Alex and Derek King and Lyle and Erik Menendez:

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.

When determining whether juveniles should be given access to a diversion program, the court should look at the offender rather than the offense. Over the past few decades, the juvenile justice system has become increasingly more punitive with a desire to “punish” rather than “rehabilitate.” Rather than (dishing out) “get tough” policy driven sentences, the juvenile court should provide alternative options of treatment in alignment with the original purpose of the juvenile court. Many opponents of diversion programs have cited to the extensive costs to maintain such treatment option. However, costs remain high if juvenile continues to participate in criminal activity and is later sent to an adult detention facility.

The crime in photo A classified as misdemeanor, since the result was not extreme harshness, and his intent was not to

According to statistics, approximately two million juveniles under the age of 18 in the United States are arrested each year. Over 600,000 of them are placed in detention centers annually and approximately 95,000 reside in secure juvenile correctional settings on any given day. Further numbers suggest that the United States leads all industrialized nations worldwide in juvenile incarcerations. With criminal records also come detrimental consequences including: difficulty of finding employment, loss of public housing, immigration concerns, increased drop-out rates and the potential of recidivism. Research on the development of the juvenile brain and the negative consequences that come with focusing solely on commitment into a facility make