Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
EVIDENCE
Go to Oyez Alvarez appealed the decision, and "moved to dismiss on the grounds that the statute violated his First Amendment right to free speech" (United States vs. Alvarez, 2012, Oyez). Alvarez could not deny the weight of the direct evidence -- he had openly lied. "The district court denied Alvarez's motion to dismiss. The respondent thereafter pleaded guilty, but reserved his right to appeal" (United States vs. Alvarez, 2012, Oyez). This case is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court and is being argued upon the constitutionality of The Stolen Valor Act of 2005. There is no question Alvarez is in violation of the terms of the Act, given the direct evidence against him. The question is whether the Act itself is constitutional.
Direct evidence vs. circumstantial evidence
Direct evidence is evidence which supports a particular point-of-view, "without inference or presumption. An example of this is the testimony of a witness who saw the knife being used to commit a crime by the defendant" (Direct evidence, 2012, Probable Cause). In the United States vs. Alvarez, the defendant Alvarez, while attending a meeting of Three Valleys Water District Board of Directors claimed in public to have been a member of the U.S. Marines and to have received the Congressional Medal of Honor. However, "the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 makes it a crime to falsely claim receipt of military decorations or medals. Mr. Alvarez was charged in the Central District of California with two counts of falsely representing that he had been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor in violation the Stolen Valor Act of 2005" (United States vs. Alvarez, 2012, Oyez).
Circumstantial evidence, in contrast, is when "this series of facts, by reason and experience, is so closely associated with the fact to be proved that the fact to be proved may be inferred simply from…
References
Circumstantial evidence. (2012). West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Retrieved:
http://www.answers.com/topic/circumstantial-evidence
Direct evidence. (2012). Probable Cause. Retrieved:
http://www.probablecause.org/directevidence.html
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_11_210
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_1259
" Then there are the "...5 million employees of the federal bureaucracy and the military" at his disposal. Also, the president runs the executive branch of government; Cummings writes that he is "chief of state" - the "ceremonial and symbolic head of state as well as head of government" (391) - as well as being "chief executive" of the government. He has the power to "grant reprieves and pardons for offenses
Criminal Law Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963) Facts: Edwards v. South Carolina is based upon an event that occurred on March 2, 1961. This is when 187 people peacefully marched upon the state capital of South Carolina to voice their problems with the inequalities facing African-Americans. After being ordered to disperse, they were arrested under the charge breach of the peace. They sued the state (in 1961) claiming that
The decision went further to suggest that, "even if possession were to be allowed for other reasons, any law regulating the use of firearms would have to be "unreasonable or inappropriate" to violate the Second Amendment." (Oyez Project, 2008). Had the decision gone the other way, gun rights activists and gun owners would have likely felt as though their constitutional rights were under attack. The District of Columbia v. Heller
Troy Stone is showing how the police engaged in questionable tactics. This is based upon the fact that they have a witness who identified him. Yet, they were not able to come up with any corroborating evidence to directly link him to the murder. To make matters worse, they violated his constitutional rights in the process. These issues are highlighting how there were questionable tactics used to obtain the
The Appeal Court reversed the decision declaring that 922(q) is invalid as it interfered in state matters. The Federal government did not have the right to interfere in matters such as possession of firearms in or near a school. The significance of the case is that it once again highlighted the limits of the power of the federal government. Chief Justice Rehnquist declared that the congress had the power to
Fourth Amendment It is a traditional belief in America that a man's home is his castle, meaning that he is lord and master of his home and no one may enter, not even the government, without his permission. This was such an important issue among the American colonists that it was included into the Constitution when they broke away from Great Britain. In short, the fourth amendment states that no private