In the case of NY v Bernhard Goetz, on December 22, 1984, a Saturday afternoon, Troy Canty, Darryl Cabey, Barry Allen, and James Ramseur boarded an IRT express subway train in the Bronx heading south toward lower Manhattan. The four young men rode together in the back section of seventh car of the train. The defendant Bernhard Goetz boarded the same subway train at 14th street in Manhattan and sat on a bench near the back section of the same car of the train as the four youths. Goetz carried an unlicensed .38 caliber pistol in his possession which was loaded with five rounds of ammunition in a waistband holster (Lender). Leaving 14th street station, the train headed towards Chambers Street. Allegedly the defendant was approached by two of the youths, presumably Canty and Allen. One of the two youths that approached Goetz, Canty, demanded, “Give me five dollars”. Goetz responded by getting up and pulling out his .38 unlicensed caliber pistol. He fired four shots striking each of the four youths and shot one of the youths, Cabey, again. The bullet severed Cabey’s spinal cord leaving him paralyzed. The rest of the youths that were struck with a bullet fully recovered from the attack.
According to the defendant he was aware that the youths did not possess any firearms or guns but was afraid based on his experience of being “maimed”. The conductor of the train , after hearing shots fired , instructed the motorman to call for emergency assistance. When the conductor went into the seventh car of the train, where the shooting took place, he saw the Goetz sitting on one of the benches while the four youths were injured lying on the floor or slumped against a seat. The defendant claimed to the conductor that the four youths were try...
... middle of paper ...
...dant on March 27, 1985. The indictment included four charges of attempted murder , four charges of assault in the first degree, one charge of reckless endangerment in the first degree, and one charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. The defendant was later arraigned on the new indictment against him, combined with the three count indictment from the first grand jury, the next day on March 28, 1985.
Work cited
Lender, D.. N.p.. Web. 8 Dec 2013. .
"People v Goetz." People v Goetz. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2013.
< http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/archives/p_goetz.htm>
"People v. Goetz | Casebriefs." Casebriefs. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2013.
< http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/criminal-law/criminal-law-keyed-to-dressler/general-defenses-to-crimes/people-v-goetz/>
In 1989, plaintiff Joseph Benning was cited for a violation of § 1256 for operating a motorcycle without wearing approved headgear in Caledonia County, Vermont. The statue states that “No person may operate or ride upon a motorcycle upon a highway unless he wears upon his head protective headgear reflectorized in part and of a type approved by the commissioner.1 The headgear shall be equipped with either a neck or chin strap.1” The County State’s Attorney dismissed the citation because he deemed the statue vague and unable to establish the elements necessary to prosecute the crime.1 However, the plaintiffs filed suit against the state, seeking to have § 1256 declared unconstitutional.
Facts: Rex Marshall testified that the deceased came into his store intoxicated, and started whispering things to his wife. The defendant stated that he ordered the deceased out of the store immediately, however the deceased refused to leave and started acting in an aggressive manner; by slamming his hate down on the counter. He then reached for the hammer, the defendant states he had reason to believe the deceased was going to hit him with the hammer attempting to kill him. Once the deceased reached for the hammer the defendant shot him almost immediately.
There have been many, many court cases throughout the history of the United States. One important case that I believe to be important is the court case of Clinton v. New York. This case involves more than just President Bill Clinton, the City of New York; it involved Snake River Farmers’ as well. This case mostly resolves around the president’s power of the line item veto. In 1996 President Bill Clinton signed the Line Item Veto Act into law. This would allow the president to get rid of a part of a bill and not disapprove the entire bill. The first time that President Clinton used this power he used it to refine the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, he got rid of a part of the bill that waived the Federal Governments statutory right to get back or receive $2.6 billion in taxes that were levied by the City of New York. President Clinton also line item vetoed a section of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 this wouldn’t allow certain food processors and refiners to sell their stock to farmers to defer the recognition of capital gains. This is when the Snake River Farmers’ and City of New York went after Clinton for doing so this is where the case of Clinton v. The City of New York originated from. In this case there were constitutional issues that were raised, major arguments presented, and the final ruling from the Supreme Court.
In 1975, the United State Supreme Court held that state law could provide students a property interest in their education, but forty years later and courts remain uncertain of when such an interest exists. In Goss v. Lopez, the United States Supreme Court extended due process protections to a group of high school students in Ohio. The Court determined that Ohio state law provided the high school students a property interest in their continued enrollment at the school, and that such an interest was protected under the due process clause. The Goss decision came during a time when a due process revolution was happening in the United States. During this revolution, the Supreme Court recognized many new property interests in government benefits as the basis
Domestic Violence is a world-wide problem but in America it is amplified with the ready availability of guns as in this article regarding Dr. Albert Lambert of Florida. Dr. Albert Lambert purchased a gun October 6, 2013 and a gun cleaning kit for a 22 caliber ten (10) days prior to the murder of Kimberly Lindsey (WPBF.com). This brutal act of domestic violence leaves three children without a mother and subsequently a father. This incident has flooded the radio, newspapers, television and internet since the ordeal started in West Palm Beach, Florida on October 27, 2013 and ended on November 4, 2013 in Miami as Sheriff’s deputies discovered Lambert’s sister and boyfriend removing Lambert’s corpse from her sisters Miami home upon their arrival to arrest and charge Dr. Lambert for the death of his ex-wife Kimberly Lindsey.
Former Chief Justice of the United States (1969 – 1986), Warren E. Burger, was published in the January 14, 1990 edition of Parade Magazine for his work entitled, “The Right to Bear Arms”. In his essay, he questions the modern age standards being held for one to purchase a firearm, with an aim to tighten up those regulations. To argue his case he has provided record breaking homicide statistics from 1988 and states that some of the metropolitan centers in the U.S. “have up to 10 times the murder rate of all of Western Europe”, where strict gun control laws have been placed.
Throughout history there has been considerable tension between race and crimes committed. The court trial of Bernhard Goetz initiated debate on race and crime in the major cities, and the limitations of self-defense. Bernhard Goetz in 1984 shot five bullets in a New York City subway, seriously wounding four young black men. After turning himself into the police nine days later, the public now knew who was the shooter. Bernhard Goetz was entitled the “Subway Vigilante”. The subway shooting incident ideally exemplified the exasperation with the high crime rates of the 1980s. Due to the time period that this incident occurred, Bernhard Goetz was commended and reviled in the media surrounding the case, and the public’s standpoint. The subway shooting, and the court trial following the shooting, lead to the uprise of the fight against crime in major cities. Justice is difficult to define, and in controversial acquittal of Bernhard Goetz, justice in this sense, was not served.
During the 111th Congress, the gun control debate was looked into by two key Supreme Court decisions. In District of Columbia v. Hel...
From the Internet, The National Rifle Association, Handgun Control Inc., Violence Policy Center, The Department of Transportation, The Journal of Firearms and Public Policy, Gun Owners of America, USA Today, The 2nd Amendment Law Library,
In a second case that happened in South Braintree, a shoe company had two employees transporting payroll boxes containing about $15,777. They weren’t ready and their boss encouraged them to walk the short distance. Then they were robbed when a couple of bandits shot and killed both men and stole the money and drove away in a buick car. The first evidence is the judge and jury ignored the physical evidence that both men weren’t in the area when the crime happened, and their guns were not the same caliber; there was a.38 while the gun reported was a.32.
The Web. The Web. 5 June 2015. Flynn, Michael W. “Handgun Laws.” quickanddirtytips.com. 2008.
Lott, Jr. John R. More Gun Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Print.
Ernesto Miranda grew up not finishing high school. He didn’t finish the 9th grade, and he decided to drop out of school during that year. He also had a criminal record and had pronounced sexual fantasies after dropping out of high school. Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix in 1963. He had raped an 18 yr. girl who was mildly mentally handicapped in March of 1963. He was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. When he was found and arrested, and he was not told of his rights before interrogation. After two hours of interrogation, the cops and detectives had a written confession from Miranda that he did do the crimes that he was acquitted for. Miranda also had a history mental instability, and had no counsel at the time of the trial. The prosecution at the trial mainly used his confession as evidence. Miranda was convicted of both counts of rape and kidnapping. He was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. He tried to appeal to the Supreme Court in
Facts: Richard Gordon escaped from jail, passed three states in the car that they had already stolen; they had two guns in possession. The car that they had started to show engine problems, so they went and looked for another vehicle; they found the Chevelle. Richard Gordon was charged with having committed the crime of "Armed Robbery" He was also accused, with intention to kill, assaulted a police officer. Richard Gordon pleaded not guilty to the charges. He was found guilty of "Armed Robbery."
Jacobs, James B., and Kimberly A. Potter. "Keeping Guns out of the ‘Wrong’ Hands: The Brady Law and the Limits of Regulation." The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86.1 (1995): 93-120. Print.