Whitley Vs Albers Case Summary

Title of Case: Lau v. Nichols: 414 US 563 (1974) Plaintiff: Kinney Kinmon Lau Defendant: Alan Nichols, San Francisco Unified School District Setting: San Francisco, CA Major Issues Raised/ What is the case about? This case examines the responsibility that a school district has to establish a program that deals with the various language issues of non-English speaking students.

In the court case, Gil vs Whitford, the major concerns of this particular case was gerrymandering. Gerrymandering, is to favor one party or class by manipulating the boundaries of those involved in the electoral constituent. This case first arose in the year 2011; in Wisconsin. In the state of Wisconsin, two republicans were elected in the states assembly and senate. Soon after that, the redirecting plan began to take place.

The court cases Goldberg and Wheeler do not stand for the proposition that only welfare benefits for people in extreme circumstances are entitled to pre-termination hearings. However, this is one situation where cutting off benefits with little or no notice could affect the well-being of the family or person. Any programs that offer they type of assistance people rely on to survive could benefit from pre-termination hearings, not just the welfare program. Welfare is one of the main public assistance programs, although I think housing assistance and food stamps might fall into the welfare category, they are also in need of a pre-termination hearing. In the Goldberg and Wheeler cases, California and New York did not want to give anyone a hearing

In 1989, former NSW police superintendent Harold James Blackburn was arrested and charged with 25 crimes under the Crimes Act 1900 which took place over a matter of nearly 20 years (New South Wales 1990). The charges included the crime of rape at Georges Hall in 1969 and sexual assault at Sutherland in 1985, as the Crimes Act 1900 had been updated during the periods of time that the alleged crimes took place (New South Wales 1990). When the case was presented to court in 1989, the Director of Public Prosecutions offered no evidence and the magistrate discharged Mr Blackburn on all charges (New South Wales 1990). A royal commission was established in 1990 to investigate the events and determine how an investigation could have failed to the

Recently, state-issued photo ID has been required in order vote since the law passed in the Texas legislature. This law has caused controversy as it brings up the question over the state’s power in the regulation of elections. “While pending review within the judicial system, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Shelby County v. Holder, which effectively ended all pending litigation. As a result, voters are now required to present an approved form of photo identification in order to vote in all Texas Elections” (votetexas.gov). The U.S. Supreme Court struck down on Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in the Shelby County v. Holder case.

Brown v. Board was one case comprised of four other cases, Briggs v. Elliot, Belton v. Gebhart, Bolling v. Sharpe, and Davis v. Prince Edward County. Briggs v. Elliot Harry Briggs lived in Clarendon County, South Carolina with his wife and five children. He, as well as many other black families sued the school district because of the conditions of the schools they were forced to send their children (Ogletree 4).

Overview of Clements v. State The case of Clements v. State is an example of how the legal framework of stalking laws in Texas should be interpreted and the effectiveness of this law to ensure justice for the victims. The case depicts how the law should operate despite certain vagueness in aspects of the First Amendment. The decision of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas to uphold the conviction while disagreeing with some conclusions arrived at by the trial court proves that stalkers will not be allowed to slide through cracks in the legal system. The case, based on a sequence of events where the complainant, Jennifer Clements, was subject to psychological trauma accompanied by an imminent physical threat to her from Nathan Clement, her estranged husband, is a forthright condition of stalking which complies with the Statues of

In Marbury v. Madison (1803) it was announced by the Supreme Court for the very first time, that if an act was deemed inconsistent with the constitution then the court was allowed to declare the act void. Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state, James Madison, denied William Marbury of his commission. President John Adams appointed William Marbury the justice of peace for the District of Columbia during his last day in office. Madison denied Marbury of this commission because he believed that because it was not issued before the termination of Adams presidency, that it was invalid. Marbury himself started a petition, along with three others who were in a similar situation.

We see multiple successes of voting equality attempted through amendments, however, the Supreme Court’s decision on Shelby County v. Holder has pushed back years and years of effort for voting rights. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was in Shelby County’s favor, stating that the Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional along with Section 5. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, who wrote the majority’s opinion, said that the power to regulate election was reserved to the states, not the federal government. As a result to the court’s decision, the federal government can no longer determine which voting law discriminates and can be passed. After the case, many states had freely passed new voting laws; the most common voting law states passed

The efforts Edina Broward made to research about her stolen painting will probably considered as diligent efforts which prevent statute of limitation from starting to run. Ms.Broward tried to find her stolen painting by many means. First of all, The police was notified by her as well as a private investigator was hired to help to find the stolen painting. Similar to Everett v. Rogers, where the owner of stolen painting informed the police and was going to hire private investigator.

INTRODUCTION The United States incarcerates a greater percentage of the population than any country in the world (CBS, 2012). According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics, over 2.3 million adults were incarcerated in federal and state prisons, and county jails in 2013. There are an additional 820,000 people on parole and 3.8 million people on probation (Wagner & Rabuy, 2016) Jail and prison differ primarily in regards to the length of stay for inmates.

A correctional facility must have a use of force policy that is constitutional and guides correctional officers in its application. The first step is to have a use of force policy to define what is considered force and when officers can use force, what types of force may be used, and what weapons are authorized (Carlton & Garrett, 2008). The policy must include a force continuum and levels of resistance along with what force is authorized for use against a certain level of resistance. The policy must contain how incidents involving the use of force are to be reported, reviewed, and what disciplinary actions will be taken for the excessive use of force. Also included should be procedures outlining the proper decontamination and medical procedures for uses of force.

State vs. Mayfield Trial On December 27th, 1989, State Police Officer Edward Mayfield pulled over Donna Nugent to a shady area where he strangled her and threw her body off of a bridge. We don’t know why he pulled her over. He then proceeded to strangle her with a rope. I believe State Police Officer Edward Mayfield is guilty of murder in the first degree because he had and hid the murder weapon, pulling over specifically blonde women, and he changed the activity log.

The court itself was appalled, because this scenario was a contradiction towards them. Everyone has the right to have proper medical care, being a regular citizen or a prisoner justice has to be given to both. In this case it wasn’t, Tomcik didn’t receive proper care which resulted in the consequences stated. A doctor has to be alert and careful of what they are writing down in their reports, the confusion between wrists and breast, this