Texas Supreme Court Case Analysis

Analysis of issues in the motion to suppress. Argument a) The police relied on the information provided by CRI-2 to form the ground for an affidavit seeking to obtain a search warrant. The information from CRI-2 was not credible and could not be independently be relied upon or verified.

3. Discuss the issue regarding the victims ' rights to notification regarding important proceeding, decisions, and actions related to their case. Under the first category of Victim’s Rights, known as The Right to be Informed, the textbook states, “all states provide victims with the right to be notified about important proceedings, decisions, and actions related to their case” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This includes the following victims are to be informed of: time and place of court proceedings, release of a defendant from custody, dismissal of charges, negotiating plea agreements, sentence imposed, and the defendant’s final release from confinement. However, issues can occur with notification from prosecutors to the victim.

The first case of the day that was heard by the Supreme Court on December 13th was Texas v. Johnson. Gregory Lee Johnson, a member of the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade, led a protest at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas to protest Ronald Reagan’s reelection. During this protest, Mr. Johnson soaked an American flag in kerosene and proceed to burn it. Mr. Johnson was then arrested and charged for violating the Texas state law that prevented the desecration of a venerated object. The proceedings began with statements from the petitioners who claimed that precedent cases such as US v. O’Brien (1968), which deemed that the burning of draft cards was an invalid form of free speech, and Boos v. Barry (1988), which reinforced

The Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 in the case of Hernandez v. Texas was the start of a breakthrough for Mexican Americans in the United States. The case was brought to existence after Pete Hernandez was accused of murder in Jackson County, a small town called Edna, Texas. The special thing about this case that makes it significant was the jury that were including in this trial. It was said that a Mexican American hadn’t served on a jury in the county of Jackson in 25 years. With the help of a Mexican American lawyer, Gustavo Garcia, the case was brought to the highest court level and was beheld as a Violation of the constitution.

Washington v. Texas (1967) is a US Supreme Court case about the right of criminal defendants to have witnesses testify on their behalf. The Court decided that the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution applied in state courts as well as federal courts. At his trial Jackie Washington had attempted to call his co-defendant as a witness but was blocked because state law prevented co-defendants from testifying for each other, under the theory that they might lie for each other on the stand. The Supreme Court reasoned that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment gives defendants the right to fair proceedings, including the right to compel defense witnesses to testify. In previous cases, the Supreme Court

A County Court judge doesn’t require a law degree because they are an administrator. The County Court judge serves as the chief executive officer for the county, meaning they have executive power over county departments. The County Court judge also controls the Commissioners Court and proposes their county’s budget (Role of the County Judge). This is different than the Supreme Court judges, who serve specifically as a judicial branch and don’t serve as an executive function.

The Texas State Court system is very structured. There are 5 levels of the Texas Courts. Level 5 starts with Justice and Municipal Courts. Justice Courts have Jurisdiction over civil actions, small crimes, and criminal misdemeanors. The Municipal courts have jurisdiction over municipal ordnance cases and criminal misdemeanors that are only punishable by fine.

There are 13 appellate courts, and they are called the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The 12 regional circuits are the 94 federal districts organized and set into groups, each controlling an appellate court. The appellate court’s task is to decide whether or not the law was carried out correctly in the trial court. Appeals courts have three judges and no jury. A court of appeals hears challenges to district court decisions from courts located within its circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies.

The structural system of the State Courts changes depending on the state and every State Court has its own characteristics, even though in some cases they are the same. One judge presides in most of the state courts of limited jurisdiction. States also have courts of general jurisdiction in which a single judge presides. These courts are usually called circuit courts or superior courts and presiding over civil and criminal important causes Layers of courts from

The plural system as used in Texas pertains to having individuals hold office in various capacities. In this system, the citizens of the state of Texas elect six officials out of the seven that make up the executive system. The electorates casts votes to choose the governor, the attorney general, the lieutenant governor, the commissioner of agriculture, the land commissioner, the commissioner of the general land office, and the comptroller ( The

On August 15, 2014, the Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, was indicted by a Travis County grand jury. The first charge of his indictment was for abuse of official capacity, which is a first-degree felony. The second charge, which has since been ruled unconstitutional, was for coercion of a public servant, which is a third-degree felony. Republican, Rick Perry 's two felony counts are based from his threat to veto $7.5 million in funding for the Public Integrity Unit and for seeking the resignation of Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg after she was convicted of drunk driving, and imprisoned. Botsford, Perry 's attorney, called the indictment a "political abuse of the court system."

The Constitution of 1876 was toward the end in the development of a new, restructured and revised constitution in Texas, yet it was not the last attempt to revise the natural law of Texas. Pressure begin to build to change and streamline the Texas Constitution in the late 1960s. By 1969, fifty-six obsolete and out dated provisions were revoked, including a whole article. This called for a more fundamental overhaul and restructuring of the Constitution, which led to an extensive and prolonged process of constitutional revision that began in the 1970s. Efforts during this time were imperative for two reasons: it explained a long-standing concern whether the legislature had the constitutional right to convene as a constitutional convention; and secondly, the Texas Constitutional Revision Commission provided a thorough revision of the state constitution that served as the foundation for a new

Having jurisdiction over all federal and state courts, the Supreme Court involves issues of federal law and consists of a small set of cases. The Supreme Court of the United States is the court of last resort. It is generally a court of appeals which means that the Court can choose which cases to hear, by granting the writs of certiorari. There is usually no right of appeal to the Supreme Court. In government there are three different levels of federal courts.

Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

Judges should be open-minded and fair, and should appear and represent themselves to be fair and open-minded. They should be good listeners but should be able, when required, to ask questions that get to the heart of the issue before the court. They should be respectful in the courtroom but strong whenever it is necessary to overpower a rambling lawyer, a disrespectful litigant or an ill-mannered