Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Family law case analysis
Family law case analysis
Family law case analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
At age twelve, Samuel Winship was arrested and charged as a juvenile delinquent for breaking into a woman's locker and stealing $112 from her pocketbook. The charge also alleged that had Winship's act been done by an adult, it would constitute larceny. Relying on Section 744(b) of the New York Family Court Act, which provided that determinations of juvenile's guilt be based on a preponderance of the evidence, a Family Court found Winship guilty, despite acknowledging that the evidence did not establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Winship's appeal of the court's use of the lower "preponderance of the evidence" burden of proof, was rejected in both the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court and in the New York Court of Appeals
A 12 year old stole money from a lady’s wallet that was stored in a locker at the time it was taken. Samuel Winship, the defendant was charged with an act of delinquency. If Samuel was charged as an adult the crime would have be larceny. A New York Family court judge convicted Samuel on a preponderance of evidence, which at the time was all that was necessary according to New York State Statute. At the time of the trial a juvenile in the state of New York was at least seven years old, but younger than 16. Samuel was 12, which by law made him a juvenile that could be charged with an act of delinquency.
At the time of the murder of which David Milgaard was accused of committing he was just 16 years old. He was a hippie, constantly in trouble. Even before he was a teenager he was getting into trouble. His parents and teachers considered him impulsive; he resisted authority (Regina Leader Post, 1992, as cited in Anderson & Anderson 1998). He was removed from kindergarten because he was considered to be a negative influence on the other children. When he was thirteen he spent time in a psychiatric centre (Anderson & Anderson, 1998)
There are many differences when it comes to gender within the trial of Thomas and Jane Weir. Women were usually domestic workers within the household and society, doing jobs such as child-rearing, weaving, and roles of mother, sister, daughter, wife and caretaker in the community. Men were either seen as the husbands of the female witchcraft users or someone of an intense authority figure. “Sir Andrew Ramsay, Lord Abbotshall then Provost of Edinburgh” were all men with high statuses within the community in Edinburgh in which Thomas lived. Women during the time of witchcraft in Scotland came to be connected with the Devil by possession while most men do not have carnal knowledge of the work of the Devil himself
James Henry Hammond was born in South Carolina on November 15th, 1807 and died on November 13th, 1864. Not only was Hammond a very wealthy plantation owner, but he was also a very successful politician. From 1835 to 1836, he served as a United States Representative. He also served as South Carolina’s Governor from 1842 to 1844. In his later years, he served as United States Senator from 1857 to 1860.
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
The use of juvenile records in adult criminal cases has been an ongoing, contested debate for many years. The effects of using one’s juvenile record in criminal court could be very damning. This week’s case summary is in regard to this very issue. In People v. Smith (1991), the defendant in this case, Ricky Smith stated that he was wrongly sentenced to the maximum length of 180 months under a statute which utilized his juvenile record to deem that he was a habitual offender. A closer examination follows.
“…and on the charge that the prisoner did with others to conspire to destroy the lives of soldiers in the military service of the United States in violation of the laws and customs of war-Guilty” were the words that soared out of Wallace’s mouth at the end of the trial. It was then that Henry Wirz was found guilty. Why? Why was he found guilty? This decision was based on the emotional aspect of the witnesses, and not by the actual guilt. Not only my defense, but also the defense of Wirz’s attorney, Baker, the testimony of the defendant, Henry Wirz, shows that Wirz should not have been found guilty.
Mack Charles Parker of Lumberton, Mississippi was born in 1936 to Liza Parker as the oldest sibling. After two years of deployment and the death of his father, he returned home to take responsibility of supporting his mother and siblings. On February 24, 1959, Parker was arrested for allegedly raping a young, pregnant, white woman, June Walters, the night before. Parker and a group of friends were out drinking and saw a broken down car on the side of the road. Parker stopped and got out of his vehicle to possibly steal the tires on the car. But after seeing Walters in the car, he turned around and left. Jimmy Walters, Junes husband, had gone to get a tow truck and left June and their daughter in the car to wait. The police suggested Parker broke into the car where he forced June and her daughter into his car and he drove to an isolated spot and raped June. Walters knew a black man had raped her but the only characteristic about Parker that matched her description was his race.
Kris Young was 25 when he was brought before the court on charges of theft. Kris was alleged to have tried to walk out of City Wear, a popular clothing store in Jurisville, without paying for a leather jacket costing $600. When stopped by the store manager, he tried to run away but was overpowered and handed over to the officers from JPD.Unable to make bail, Kris remained in custody for 60 days during which he pleaded guilty to theft. Based on the plea and the circumstances of the case, the judge sentenced Kris to a year in prison. Later the sentence was suspended and Kris was ordered to be under probation. The probation officer was asked to report back to the court after 3 months.
Ricky Franklin Smith was convicted for the breaking and entering that he plead guilty for. At the time of sentencing, the presentence investigation report contained his juvenile criminal record which was supposed to be automatically expunged. Smith appealed that he should be resentenced due to the presentence investigation report. The argument was to whether or not grant Smith the resentencing. In two previous cases, both arguments were made. In People v. Price ruled that the juvenile record that is automatically expunged, could not be considered at the time of sentencing or used in the presentence investigation report. On the other hand, in People v. Jones, the court ruled that it could be considered at the time of sentencing and used in the presentence investigation report. “The majority concluded that Price presented the better-reasoned approach. They added that the automatic expungement of juvenile convictions "is delusive and purposeless if law enforcement agencies may continue to use supposedly expunged records against a defendant to his prejudice. Following the Jones approach effectively subverts MCR 5.913."[7] The dissenting judge said that he believed that Jones represented "the better-reasoned analysis."[8]” (Justia.Law, 2015).
He was caught taking a small bag of candy, a candy bar, bag of chips and a soda in which he did have the money to pay for but choose not to pay. Although, he was only eleven years old he was still charged with this crime as a juvenile and it was considered to be a misdemeanor under the state law of South Carolina Sections 22-3-540, 22-3-545, 22-3-550, and 14-25-65 (scstatehouse.gov, n.d.). Therefore, as a juvenile his crime was turned over to family court but that was not the only trouble he found himself to be a part of in a short time. Rather than stay at home after he found himself facing misdemeanor charges for shop-lifting he found himself later getting a simple assault charge as well. Now in the state of South Carolina simple assault is the carried out of a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm (S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-600)(criminaldefenselawyer.com, n.d.). Therefore, he was charged with two misdemeanor crimes and was released to the care of his parents until his hearing date because as a juvenile he is entitled to a hearing in family court unless he is being tried as an adult. Furthermore, he had never been into any trouble with the local law or any law enforcement agency until these two incidents. There was also the fact that he had no known gang affiliation besides hanging with some known gang members but that is not enough
For three hours and a half in a courtroom at Boise, Ohio, Harry Orchard assembled in the witness chair at the Haywood trial and recounted a record of offenses, slaughter, and murder… the like of which no individual in the overcrowded courtroom had ever thought of. Not in the entire scope of "Bloody Gulch" literature will there be exposed anything that approaches an equivalent to the atrocious narrative so motionlessly, coolly, and composedly voiced by this audacious, disimpassioned man-slaughterer.
In "a view from the Bridge", justice and law are not presented as being synonymous.
Analysis of The Hanged Man's Bride, The Trial for Murder and Confession Found in a Prison
This trial, without going into the particular details of it could be summarised as it follows: