criminal

State the courts definition of (imminent) danger. Charles E. Haynes (Defendant-Appellant) entered a conditional plea of guilty in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, to assault. Haynes appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Nelson Flores-Pedroso was playing dominoes after lunch in the cafeteria of the federal prison in Oxford, Wisconsin, […]

Do you agree that Myah Batie was the original or primary aggressor? Batie [also] argues that the jury’s verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. In a manifest weight analysis, an appellate court reviews the entire record, weighs the evidence and all reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses Do you agree that

According to the court, what is the difference between a (primary physical aggressor) and an (initial aggressor)? Here, it cannot be said that allowing the testimony resulted in prejudice to the defendant. At trial, the state introduced numerous photographic exhibits detailing the extent of the husband’s injuries. Many of these exhibits detailed what appeared to

Summarize the courts arguments to support its decision. The first prong of the test asks, in essence, whether the defendant was the initial aggressor. While the primary physical aggressor inquiry is not necessarily the same as whether a person was the initial aggressor, the primary aggressor question can nonetheless undermine a claim of self-defense. This

List all the facts relevant to deciding whether Myah Batie was the initial aggressor. On March 11, 2014, a jury convicted Myah Evans Batie of domestic violence in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) with a prior conviction specification. The charge arose out of a physical altercation between Batie and her husband, where the husband called 911

Ninham and the other four juveniles  Omer Ninham (Defendant) was convicted of firstdegree intentional homicide and was sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole. Ninham filed a motion for relief from his life sentence, seeking to allow for the possibility of parole. The Circuit Court denied the motion. Ninham appealed. The Supreme Court

United States Supreme Court (Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 [2005]), I conclude, as has the United States Supreme Court (Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 [2005]), that the differences between juveniles and adults mean that juvenile offenders “cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders.” The three general differences are: (1) juveniles have

who committed an intentional, brutal, senseless, grotesque, reprehensible murder of a 13-year-old innocent stranger. First, we hold that sentencing a 14-year-old to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for committing intentional homicide is not categorically unconstitutional. We arrive at our holding by applying the two-step approach employed by the United States Supreme Court, most

The pre-sentence investigation (PSI) Ninham and the other four juveniles never checked on Vang’s condition and instead ran from the scene. Still, the Green Bay Police Department was able to focus its investigation on the five juveniles after some of them, in particular, Jeffrey P. and Amanda G., indicated to relatives and police that they

According to the Court, some crimes are worse than death. Do you agree? Is child rape one of them? The evidence of a national consensus with respect to the death penalty for child rapists, as with respect to juveniles, mentally retarded offenders, and vicarious felony murderers, shows divided opinion but, on balance, an opinion against