Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Justice and its importance
Justice and its importance
Justice and its importance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Justice and its importance
1. T. „Dub“ Wise was robbed and killed on April 18, 1983 in his house in Houston, Texas. Burdine and Wise had a homosexual relationship and lived together for three months. Calvin Burdine admitted that he was there when W.T. Wise was killed and he also said that he had known that a robbery was planned. But evidence point to accomplice Douglas McCreight as the one who did the murder. Interesting is that Douglas McCreight pleaded guilty of murder. Calvin Burdine pleaded not guilty, but in trial the jury found him guilty. Calvin Burdine was sentenced to death, Douglas McCreight was released on parole after 8 years in prison
The U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) on Monday rejected an appeal by Texas, which wanted to execute a death row inmate even though his lawyer slept repeatedly during his 1984 murder trial in Houston.
The justices let stand a U.S. appeals court ruling that Calvin Burdine deserved a new trial because his lawyer dozed off frequently enough and for long enough stretches to deprive him of his constitutional right to effective legal assistance. Texas wanted to carry out the execution. Even though the court-appointed lawyer was "repeatedly unconscious" during the trial, Texas argued it did not affect the outcome, which ended with Burdine being found guilty and sentenced to die for fatally stabbing his gay lover.
2. This case clearly has nothing to do with homosexuality, more so than equality and justice. This case goes to show that justice is not always served through the legal system. It illustrates that every one is not always offered a fair trial. I believe they did the right thing in letting Burdine be retried because his lawyer kept falling asleep. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty but this case reveals that once society has formed their own opinion about you, or his lawyer in this case, there's is nothing anyone can do to help in the legal system. That’s sad because if Burdine is innocent, he had no voice to speak up for him and this could be another case of an innocent man being executed.
3. Public policy is any type of actual or proposed government action to address social problems. There are three branches of our government: legislative, executive, and judicial. The actions that are taken by members of these three branches are public policies. In elementary school, you learned that the legislative branch makes the laws, the executive enforces them, and the judicial interprets them.
The crime he committed was terrible and obviously something that could only be done with someone who lacks any good intentions. His behavior during the his trial also showed the extent of his maliciousness. He half-heartedly attempted to defend himself by claiming the prosecutors were using false evidence and that, according the records of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, “Nobles concludes that he was denied the fundamentally fair and impartial trial guaranteed him by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment”. He put very little effort into defending himself during the trial and was quickly sentenced to death. In the early years of his time in prison he was far from the ideal prisoner. Earle presents how “He once broke away from guards while returning to his cell from the exercise yard and climbed the exposed pipes and bars in the cell block, kicking down television sets suspended outside on the bottom tier.” and on another occasion he cut himself just so he could hit an officer while they were attending to him before he passed out. This kind of behavior was completely eradicated long before he was executed, procuring him the respect of the prison
The case of Ford V. Wainwright is a Supreme court case of the United Stated argued in 1986. Alvin Bernard Ford is the plaintiff in this case, In 1974 he was convicted of murder in Florida and sentenced to death. In 1982 Ford began to show signs of a serious mental disorder. The Governor of Florida then appointed a panel of three psychiatrist to determine if Ford was component to understand the nature of the death penalty and the crime he had committed. All three psychiatrist disagreed on his exact diagnosis but agreed that he was sane and knew the nature of the death penalty. Ford’s attorney unsuccessfully sought a hearing in the state court for determination of his competency and then filed a hebeas corpus petition, which is a writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge or court especially for investigation of a restraint of the person’s liberty. The Florida courts denied his petition and signed a death warrant for Ford in 1984. Ford then sued Louie L. Wainwright, the defendant, who at the time of the case was the Secretary of the Florida Division of Correction.
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
Even though he was not convicted for the rape, the evidence clearing him of rape, stood for the robbery too, as they were both connected. In 1979, two black assailants forced a man and a woman at gun point into the man’s car at a drive-in grocery store. As they were going down the highway, the perpetrators robbed both victims, then forced the man out of the car. After a failed escape attempt by the woman, the two men drove her to a nearby park where they raped her.
Defendant Freddie Lee Hall filed a motion to declare Florida Statute 921.137 (Florida Statute) as contrary to Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and, thus, unconstitutional. Hall, convicted in 1981 for the murder of Karol Hurst, was initially sentenced to death in September 1982. For three years, he fought his sentence, filing “a motion to vacate, a petition for writ of habeas corpus and an application for a stay of execution, all of which were denied” . In 1986, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard his appeal and reversed part of the lower court’s ruling, a decision granted when the court found Hall “entitled to a hearing on the issues of his absence from the courtroom and whether he deliberately bypassed his ineffective assistance of counsel claim” .
In 1972, the Furman v. Georgia case temporarily caused capital punishment in the United States to cease until distinct guidelines about the crimes that required the death penalty were written. Until states revised their laws, capital punishment was ruled cruel and unusual punishment. Before Furman, there were no clearly defined laws about what constituted capital punishment, so the process to sentence a capital criminal was much faster and easier. By adding an appeal system, most states permitted capital punishment once again, but the prisoner’s time spent on death row drastically increased. Adding an appeal system did not make killing a human being any less cruel and unusual; in fact, ordering a person to live in fear, uncertainty, and agony for an even longer period of time is crueler than quickly ending the
July 15, 1999, was an ordinary night for Kristopher Lohrmeyer as he left work at the Colorado City Creamer, a popular ice cream parlor. Kristopher had no idea that his life was about to end. When Michael Brown, 17, Derrick Miller and Andrew (Andy) Medina, 15, approached Kristopher and demanded his money and his car keys. Before the boys knew it shots had been fired and Kristopher was dead. About an hour after the fatal shooting of Kristopher Lohrmeyer, all three men were in custody and telling their version of the night’s events. Michael and Derrick who had run away after the shooting confessed to police and named Andy as the shooter. According to the three boy’s testimony, they had only recently met and needed away to get some quick cash, so they developed a carjacking scheme and headed to Andy’s house to pick up 2 stolen handguns. The three boys were uneducated and had spent most of their time on the streets in search of drugs. The judge ruled that they would be held without bail and there was probable cause to charge them all with first-degree murder (Thrown Away, 2005).
A court case that made it to the Supreme Court was the case of Kevin Nigel Stanford, who was convicted in 1981 of a murder committed in Kentucky when he was 17 years and 4 months old. Stanford and an accomplice repeatedly raped and sodomized a 20-year-old woman during the robbery of a gas station where she worked. The men took her to a wooded area, and Stanford shot her straight in the face, then in the back of the head, to prevent her from testifying against him. Stanford's case first came to the Supreme Court in 1989. In the decision Stanford vs. Kentucky, a narrow Supreme Court majority ruled the execution of death row inmates who killed before they were 18 was not then cruel and unusual punishment, following the 8th amendment of the Constitution.
To support their conclusion the board tells the story of two men who were exonerated after spending thirty years in prison for a crime they did not commit. Days after the rape and murder of eleven year old Sabrina Buie, half-brothers Henry Lee McCollum and Leon Brown confessed to the crime. Not only were their confessions made under pressure without parents or an attorney present, but the prosecution failed to present multiple pieces of evidence to the defense lawyers, DNA evidence that proved McCollum and Brown were not responsible for the murder. In fact, the DNA belonged to a Roscoe Artis, who was a suspect all along and was convicted of a similar crime just weeks later.
Since Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court struck down Georgia’s death penalty due to infrequencies and the randomness of the imposition of the death penalty. (Mandery, 2012, p.135). The two justices who switched sides between the Furman case and the Gregg case, both expressed mayor concern in Furman with the infrequency and randomness with which juries imposed the death penalty. “For Justice Potter Stewart, the arbitrariness was a matter of fairness. For Justice Byron White, the concern was utilitarian a randomly and infrequently imposed death penalty could not possibly deter” (Mandery, 2012, p.135), they both expressed similar concerns about the apparent arbitrariness with which death sentences were imposed under the existing law, each found the unpredictability of the original statute fatal, it seems only fair to ask whether the revised Georgia statute has created greater rationality. (Mandery, 2012, p.135) The Supreme Court realized that the process in which defendants were being persecuted was not based a fairness practices; it was administrated in a different way by different judges, juries, prosecutors, etc. The Supreme Court found only how the death penalty was applied was cruel and unusual; it was too uneven and inconsistent. As a result of the 1972 Furman decision, hundreds of inmates on death row had their sentences commuted to life, and a significant number of those inmates have now been
In the early 1950’s, the number of executions sharply declined. Opponents of the death penalty claimed that it violated the Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Opponents also claimed the death penalty violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. In early 1972, William Furman was convicted of burglary and murder. While Furman was burglarizing a home, a resident arrived at the scene. Startled, Furman tried to flee, but tripped and fell in the process. The gun Furman was carrying discharged, killing the resident in the process. Furman did not believe he deserved the death penalty. The constitutionality of capital punishment in this circumstance was considered in the supreme co...
...t I do not think that the evidence presented is enough for a conviction to sentence any man or woman to death.
Policy in my perspective illustrates as a decision making, planning and or action taken to achieve a certain specific goal within our society. According to Longest B. (2010), his definition stated in his text book states that a policy is defined as ” authoritative decisions made in the legislative, executive, or judicial branches of government that are intended to direct or influence the actions, behaviors, or decisions of others.” In developing a policy, certain steps need to be taken in act to implement the policy. The crucial steps in implementing a policy are: recognizing the problem, agenda setting, formulating the policy, and finally implementing the policy (N.A., 2015).
The basis for county, city and special district governing and authority are laid out in the State Constitution and Government Code. Counties in California are responsible for providing limited services to unincorporated areas. The state Legislature created the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in 1963 to control local government fragmentation. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) gives counties the power to tax, create special districts and annex unincorporated land to cities in the county (League of Women Voters, 1992).
Public policy can be defined as “What ever governments choose to do or not do” (Dye, 2008, p 2). In the context of this essay, public policies are a set of actors by the government in order to reach out to the masses. The ministries and departments are mandated to deliver specific mandates in the form of public goods and services.