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.
O'Brien and Burgess were armed during an attempted robbery. Count three of their condemnation charged them with using a weapon so as to commit a robbery with violence offence, which carries at least compulsory five-year jail term. The count four states using a machinegun to commit crime carries a thirty year compulsory minimum term. The government thenceforth challenged and disapproved the fourth count on the arguing that it could not set up the count beyond a realistic doubt. However it lamented that machinegun provision was a sentencing augmentation to be decided by the District Court upon a sentencing on count three. Subsequently, the court disapproaved count four. Further, it discarded the government's sentencing-augmentation position. O'Brien conceded that he had committed the crime and was sentenced to a one hundred and two-month jail term. Burgess too conceded and was sentenced to an eighty four-month jail term. Basically, the 1998 adjustment split what was once a long major sentence into distinct subparagraphs. Therefore, the Court's noted that Congress inserted the words 'uses or carries a firearm' and the word 'machinegun' in a single sentence. The sentence was not separated into subsections and thus it does not hold true.
The...
Graham was only sixteen when he committed a robbery with violence crime while armed. The Florida trial court sentenced Graham to probation and suspended arbitration of offence. Consequently, the trial court discovered that Graham had abused the terms of his probation by committing a supplementary offence. The court arbitrated Graham guilty of the previous charges. It went ahead and cancelled his probation. Additionally, it convicted him to life in jail for the robbery. Since Florida has eliminated its parole system, Graham had no other option but to challenge his sentence under the eighth amendment's cruel and unusual punishments clause. The Court's cases executing the proportionality standard fall inside two broad categories. The insufficiency of penological assumption to validate life without parole sentences for young non-suicidal offenders. Secondly, the harshness of all the sentences imposed on Graham. Thus the Court made a ruling and affirmed that the sentencing practice is nasty and strange (Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute).
Reference
Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute. Supreme Court. 28 May 2010
Reference
Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute. Supreme Court. 28 May 2010
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/>
Supreme Court cases (Muller V. Oregon) women's right Why it was an issue of national importance The Muller v. Oregon case was among the most crucial Supreme Court cases in the U.S. during the progressive regime. The case held an Oregon law that limited the working days for female wage employees to a maximum of ten hours. In 1908, this case created a precedent to expand access of national activities into the
7. Sester v. United States - Docket No., 10-7387 -- The question is whether a district court has authority to order a federal sentence to run consecutive to an anticipated, but not-yet-imposed, state sentence ? 8. Williams v. Illinois - Docket No., 10-8505 -- The question is whether a state rule of evidence allowing an expert witness to testify about the results of DNA testing performed by non-testifying analysts, where the
D. joined the Majority. Justices Blackmun, H.A. And Powell, L.F. wrote a special and regular concurrence respectively. In addition to voting with the majority, O'Connor S.D. joined Powel's concurrence. Writing Dissenting Opinion(s): Stevens, J.P. filed a dissenting opinion in which Marshall, T. And Brennan, W.J joined. Brennan also filed a separate dissenting opinion in which Marshall T. joined. Case 5 Citation: Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe (2000) Argued: March 29, 2000 Date
Chief Justice Warren noted in the syllabus of the case, Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of
1 Cummings v. Board of Education (1899), Berea College v. Kentucky (1908), and Gong Lum v. Rice (1927) were three Supreme Court cases that followed Plessy v. Ferguson and that led to the segregation of schools and the establishment of the separate but equal doctrine that Plessy v. Ferguson set in motion. In Cummings v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that a Georgia county school board was perfectly within
long-term impact of Florence v. The Board of Chosen Freeholders. This will be accomplished by: studying the parties involved, discussing the facts of the case, identifying the constitutional issues, examining the decision in terms of the vote, the opinion of the court, the dissenting views and the significance of the case. Once this takes place, is when we can provide specific insights that will illustrate how this will affect