Critical Evaluation Of Bordenkircher Vs. Hayes

New York Times (NYT) column-writer, conversely a certified lawyer, Adam Liptak, in his article, “Supreme Court Rejects Alabama Death Row Inmate’s Appeal”, describes how a death-row inmate from Alabama requests death by a firing squad as opposed to lethal injection, that contains the sedative midazolam, for his death sentence, but was rejected by the Supreme Court of the United States. Liptak’s purpose is to demonstrate that the Supreme Court’s decision to reject the appeal may have been unconstitutional due to the means of execution by lethal injection causing “prolonged torture” rather than a quick death due to midazolam, which disputes the eighth amendment in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Liptak develops

CNN reported on August 1, 2014 that 43-year-old Eric Garner died on July 17 after being confronted by police on Staten Island for allegedly selling cigarettes illegally. As police officers approached Garner he raised both hands in the air and told the officers not to touch him. Moments later, a video recording shows an officer grabbing the 350-pound man from behind in a choke hold and wrestled him to the ground, rolling him onto his stomach. CNN News also reports that the video has Eric crying repeatedly that he could not breathe until his last gasp. Evidence and Applicable Laws Julie Bolcer, a representative of the NY medical examiner 's office confirmed that the cause of death was "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police.

The Supreme Court ordered that such “deliberate indifference” to an inmate 's “serious medical needs” was a violation of that inmate 's Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. This case guaranteed three basic rights: the right to access to care, the right to care that is ordered, and the right to professional medical judgment.

In the state of Maryland on July 29th, 1986 Kirk Noble Bloodsworth was brought to trial. The crimes that were said to be committed were; first degree murder, first degree rape, and first degree sexual offense. The defendants in the case were the following; Julia Doyle Bernhardt and George E. Burns, Jr., Asst. Public Defenders (Alan H. Murrell, Public Defender, on brief), Baltimore, for appellant. Valerie V. Cloutier, Asst.

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

Plea bargain are intend for when the prosecutor has enough evidence to put some into prison they can reduce they charges they are being tried with. This will also reduce

Plea bargain also helps to reduce overcrowding. For those who are guilty, plea bargaining is more of an advantage to them. The plea bargain can be misleading if not used correctly. The cons about plea bargaining is the intention of being accused are giving up the right to have an amount of people hear all the evidence. Or even be able to test to see if

The most important issue that must be addressed in this case is the principle of the “evolving standards of decency” and the uses of a national consensus. The “evolving standards of decency” were developed by Trop v. Dulles and have been implemented in one way or another in all of the precedents dealing with “cruel and unusual” punishment. It is important to treat these principles as an important aspect of “cruel and unusual” punishment jurisprudence, therefore turning from these set of principles would be foolish and a disregard for every precedent. However, it is important to acknowledge that each case satisfies the standards by using a different method; some use the presence or lack of state legislature as a judgment of consensus while others look at foreign countries.

Both sides will carefully weigh the strength of their case and decide whether it is prudent to go to trial. The prosecution may also consider the publicity surrounding the case and whether there is public pressure to prosecute that particular defendant to the full extent of the law. The defense will consider the individual defendant’s desire to go to trial and the seriousness of the potential sentence. The Pros of Plea Bargaining

The Eighth Amendment or Amendment VIII of the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights, and declares that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” , thus proscribes disproportionate bails , inequitable and degrading to human dignity sanctions for any types of criminal offenses, as well as monetary penalties that are exceptionally high. Amendment VIII is significant because according to the legal system of the United States of America, an individual accused of a crime is “presumed innocent until proven guilty” and therefore, allowing disproportionate bail amounts to be set, would carry the risk of holding innocent people in custody, sometimes

PLEA BARGAINING Plea bargaining is a process of negotiation and results in a plea agreement between the defendant and the prosecutor for lesser charges. Basically, plea bargaining circumvents the trial process by evading more serious charges. About 97% of federal cases and 94% of state cases are disposed of by this method without ever going to trial. There can be advantages and disadvantages to this.

The reason for our system is to punish those who are guilty and there shouldn’t be a loop hole for those who decide to tell the truth after they’ve committed a crime. Plea bargaining is an easy way out to make a case end and I personally don’t consider the questioning of someone’s freedom to be an easy process. Like Lynch (2003) said, “As with so many other areas of constitutional law, the Court must stop tinkering around the edges of the issue and return to first principles”

The Eight Amendment Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel, and unusual punishments inflicted. Previously the Eight Amendment was formed very differently from what we know today. The death penalty has been one of the most discussed topics since it first became a part of society. It is a constant disagreement to prove or challenge whether or not the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment which would then now go against the eighth amendment. The death penalty is a suitable sentence, while going through the history, and different methods.

Since the courts are backlogged and many public defenders and judges being overworked, this causes plea bargaining to be used repeatedly. According to Walker et al. (2018), plea bargaining leaves many people no option but to plea guilty even when this is not their best option. This is due to a multitude of reasons but mainly to receive a lesser charge. For example, a felony and little time in jail may be better than risking multiple felonies and an excessive amount of time in jail.

Explain the goals of sentencing. Identify several criteria used in determining the appropriate sentence. What constitutional rights exist during sentencing? While a trail jury can determine innocence or guilt Judges decide on the punishments for a specific crime. The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."