Law homework help

/in /by

Unit 5 AS: Gagnon and Morrissey

Find the following cases:
• GAGNON v. SCARPELLI, 411 U.S. 778, 36 L. Ed. 2d 656, 93 S. Ct. 1756 (1973)
• MORRISSEY v. BREWER, 408 U.S. 471, 33 L. Ed. 2d 484, 92 S. Ct. 2593 (1972)
In addition to summarizing the importance of these cases, be sure to discuss, analyze and evaluate the following questions:
1. In your opinion, did the two Courts provide a fair and just resolution to the issues presented? Be specific.
2. In the eyes of society, was the impact of these cases “desirable?” Simply, did society benefit from the “message” that these Courts sent with respect to their findings?
In addition to external research, remember to review the lecture, readings and resources for this unit to help you formulate your responses. Please be sure to fully develop your responses to each question presented. Your position, argument or rationale should never be assumed.

Law homework help

/in /by

Unit 5 AS: Gagnon and Morrissey

Find the following cases:
• GAGNON v. SCARPELLI, 411 U.S. 778, 36 L. Ed. 2d 656, 93 S. Ct. 1756 (1973)
• MORRISSEY v. BREWER, 408 U.S. 471, 33 L. Ed. 2d 484, 92 S. Ct. 2593 (1972)
In addition to summarizing the importance of these cases, be sure to discuss, analyze and evaluate the following questions:
1. In your opinion, did the two Courts provide a fair and just resolution to the issues presented? Be specific.
2. In the eyes of society, was the impact of these cases “desirable?” Simply, did society benefit from the “message” that these Courts sent with respect to their findings?
In addition to external research, remember to review the lecture, readings and resources for this unit to help you formulate your responses. Please be sure to fully develop your responses to each question presented. Your position, argument or rationale should never be assumed.

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Hearsay is a statement that offers evidence that proves the truth of the matter in a statement this is besides any statements made by declarant during testifying at trial (Hail, 2014). Hearsay evidence may be deemed inadmissible in a criminal proceeding if a statute or rule does not prove otherwise. For example if Joey is on trial and his friend Brian stands outside the court room stating exactly how Joey is guilty this is hearsay. This evidence would be secondhand and deemed inadmissible which means it serves no use to the trial or court whether this information is true or false. Another form of inadmissible hearsay would be a witness stating her testimony and someone from outside of the court room stating a testimony. This would be inadmissible whether the information is true or false due to them not being an actual witness to the case.

 

  1. Hearsay is a statement that the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and the party offers evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement (Hails, 2018). The rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second-hand statements from being used as evidence at trial, given their potential unreliability (FindLaw’s Team, 2019). Hearsay evidence may be deemed inadmissible. For example, a couple in Jane’s job is going through a divorce. Jane heard a rumor from her coworkers that Joe was unfaithful to his wife but did not have evidence that Joe was unfaithful to his wife. Jane did not observe Joe cheating, nor did Joe tell Jane he was cheating, therefore not having direct knowledge of the affair. Jane would not be able to testify during the divorce proceeding about Joe being unfaithful. Another example, Angel is a witness for a murder trial. Being the first witness, Angel testifies that Liz told him that she saw the defendant kill the case’s victim. Liz did not testify at the trial. The statement that Angel made was to show that the defendant killed the victim. It would be considered inadmissible hearsay evidence.

 

  1. Hearsay is when a  witness is reciting an out-of-court statement to prove the truth of the issue asserted. For example, a law enforcement officer can be called to stand to verify what the witness said during the interrogation. Hearsay evidence may be inadmissible in a criminal proceeding for many reasons. The first reason being if the witness clearly shows signs that they are mentally or emotionally unstable to make a statement. This is inadmissible because it is not reliable that the statement the witness gives is valid. The second reason is if the witness changes their alibi or the sequence of events when the crime occurred. If the witness keeps changing the story it is not reliable, it just proves that the witness is a liar.

 

  1. Hearsay is a statement which is made outside of the courtroom, brought up in an attempt to prove its assertion. For example, if Johnny testifies in a court of law that he heard his friend Logan tell him that he witnessed a murder carried out by the defendant, but the Logan is not at the trial, this statement is considered hearsay. Because the statement being discussed is made by someone from outside of a courtroom. Another example would be a similar situation in which Johnny testifies the same as he did the first time, but Logan is actually able to testify at the trials. In this situation, the hearsay is admissible.

 

  1. Hearsay is information received from other people that one cannot adequately confirm. From a legal standpoint, it is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible unless an exception applies.

For example, to prove that Tom was in town, the attorney asks a witness, “What did Susan tell you about Tom being in town?” Since the witness’s answer will rely on an out-of-court statement that Susan made, if Susan is unavailable for cross examination, the answer is hearsay. Note, however, that if the attorney asking the same question is not trying to prove the truth of the assertion about Tom being in town but the fact that Susan said the specific words, it may be acceptable.  If you’re facing a criminal trial, there may be several pieces of evidence that the government is relying on for their case. However, that doesn’t mean that the evidence is admissible in court. A skilled criminal defense attorney can challenge questionable evidence, such as hearsay statements, and help you prepare your strongest defense.
 
 

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Hearsay is a statement that offers evidence that proves the truth of the matter in a statement this is besides any statements made by declarant during testifying at trial (Hail, 2014). Hearsay evidence may be deemed inadmissible in a criminal proceeding if a statute or rule does not prove otherwise. For example if Joey is on trial and his friend Brian stands outside the court room stating exactly how Joey is guilty this is hearsay. This evidence would be secondhand and deemed inadmissible which means it serves no use to the trial or court whether this information is true or false. Another form of inadmissible hearsay would be a witness stating her testimony and someone from outside of the court room stating a testimony. This would be inadmissible whether the information is true or false due to them not being an actual witness to the case.

 

  1. Hearsay is a statement that the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and the party offers evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement (Hails, 2018). The rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second-hand statements from being used as evidence at trial, given their potential unreliability (FindLaw’s Team, 2019). Hearsay evidence may be deemed inadmissible. For example, a couple in Jane’s job is going through a divorce. Jane heard a rumor from her coworkers that Joe was unfaithful to his wife but did not have evidence that Joe was unfaithful to his wife. Jane did not observe Joe cheating, nor did Joe tell Jane he was cheating, therefore not having direct knowledge of the affair. Jane would not be able to testify during the divorce proceeding about Joe being unfaithful. Another example, Angel is a witness for a murder trial. Being the first witness, Angel testifies that Liz told him that she saw the defendant kill the case’s victim. Liz did not testify at the trial. The statement that Angel made was to show that the defendant killed the victim. It would be considered inadmissible hearsay evidence.

 

  1. Hearsay is when a  witness is reciting an out-of-court statement to prove the truth of the issue asserted. For example, a law enforcement officer can be called to stand to verify what the witness said during the interrogation. Hearsay evidence may be inadmissible in a criminal proceeding for many reasons. The first reason being if the witness clearly shows signs that they are mentally or emotionally unstable to make a statement. This is inadmissible because it is not reliable that the statement the witness gives is valid. The second reason is if the witness changes their alibi or the sequence of events when the crime occurred. If the witness keeps changing the story it is not reliable, it just proves that the witness is a liar.

 

  1. Hearsay is a statement which is made outside of the courtroom, brought up in an attempt to prove its assertion. For example, if Johnny testifies in a court of law that he heard his friend Logan tell him that he witnessed a murder carried out by the defendant, but the Logan is not at the trial, this statement is considered hearsay. Because the statement being discussed is made by someone from outside of a courtroom. Another example would be a similar situation in which Johnny testifies the same as he did the first time, but Logan is actually able to testify at the trials. In this situation, the hearsay is admissible.

 

  1. Hearsay is information received from other people that one cannot adequately confirm. From a legal standpoint, it is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible unless an exception applies.

For example, to prove that Tom was in town, the attorney asks a witness, “What did Susan tell you about Tom being in town?” Since the witness’s answer will rely on an out-of-court statement that Susan made, if Susan is unavailable for cross examination, the answer is hearsay. Note, however, that if the attorney asking the same question is not trying to prove the truth of the assertion about Tom being in town but the fact that Susan said the specific words, it may be acceptable.  If you’re facing a criminal trial, there may be several pieces of evidence that the government is relying on for their case. However, that doesn’t mean that the evidence is admissible in court. A skilled criminal defense attorney can challenge questionable evidence, such as hearsay statements, and help you prepare your strongest defense.
 
 

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Intermediate punishments are used as a more severe punishment. While also allowing the individual to not be incarcerated behind bars. The purpose of these punishments is to allow for more space to be open in jails for more severe cases. As well as save money by not having an individual be in jail. I believe the best form of punishment depends on the case. If an individual was arrested on drug charges, perhaps their punishment should be completing a drug abuse course. While also passing drug tests.

 

  1. Intermediate sanctions are criminal penalties that do not include jail time or probation. Rather, intermediate sanctions fall in the middle of these types of punishments and offer an alternative to them. Intermediate sanctions are intended to provide judges with more flexibility when directing sentences (Intermediate Sanctions: Definition, Types, Pros & Cons, 2017). According to Abadinsky (2015), the stated explanation for intermediate punishments is a classical emphasis matching the sanction to the offense, while the actual purpose is to reduce incarceration. Some types of Intermediate sanctions include but are not limited to the following:  House arrest, fines, close monitoring, community service, electronic monitoring, and living in a monitored residential community. In my opinion, I do not think one punishment is better or more practical than the other and I believe that to determine that it depends on the severity of the crime that had been committed by the offender.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are punishments that do not require jail time and there is an alternative offered to prison. This form of punishment is beneficial for many reasons. For one, it creates more space in jail so that there is room for individuals that committed more severe cases. By not sending these individuals to jail, there is a very large amount of money that is saved as well. I believe that there is not a single form of punishment that can be applied for every case. I think that punishment should be determined on a case by case basis. No two cases are the same. There is always going to be different ways that the crime happened, different motivations for the crime happening and different details of each crime. Therefore, there isn’t one specific punishment that can apply for every single crime.

 
 

  1. Intermediate punishments are in between probation and prison. Two common examples are day reporting and electronic monitoring (Abadinsky, 2015). The idea behind intermediate punishments is to provide a scale for punishments to better suit all individuals rather than those on the lower end of criminality and those on the upper end. Intermediate punishments are able to effectively and fairly provide punishment for those in the middle that may not be at the level of prison but deserve more than probation. Being that there are more than one type of crime, there should be more than one type of punishment. With that being said, for crimes that do not hurt others, like non-violent drug offenses, then the individual’s punishment should be positive, to help them better themselves and get them back on the right track. Then, if an individual commits a crime that may hurt another, they should have a mixture of punishment, and positivity. Lastly, if the individual shows to be relentless in their endeavors to hurt or even kill others, they should receive the punishment, with very little positivity.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are half and half. This includes incarceration and parole. Intermediate punishments allows for offenders to be released due to overcrowding. Intermediate punishments holds purpose in many different aspects. The punishment I find to be more practical is being incarcerated. This gives the feeling of a lack of freedom which can give offenders time to turn their life around.

 
 
 

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Intermediate punishments are used as a more severe punishment. While also allowing the individual to not be incarcerated behind bars. The purpose of these punishments is to allow for more space to be open in jails for more severe cases. As well as save money by not having an individual be in jail. I believe the best form of punishment depends on the case. If an individual was arrested on drug charges, perhaps their punishment should be completing a drug abuse course. While also passing drug tests.

 

  1. Intermediate sanctions are criminal penalties that do not include jail time or probation. Rather, intermediate sanctions fall in the middle of these types of punishments and offer an alternative to them. Intermediate sanctions are intended to provide judges with more flexibility when directing sentences (Intermediate Sanctions: Definition, Types, Pros & Cons, 2017). According to Abadinsky (2015), the stated explanation for intermediate punishments is a classical emphasis matching the sanction to the offense, while the actual purpose is to reduce incarceration. Some types of Intermediate sanctions include but are not limited to the following:  House arrest, fines, close monitoring, community service, electronic monitoring, and living in a monitored residential community. In my opinion, I do not think one punishment is better or more practical than the other and I believe that to determine that it depends on the severity of the crime that had been committed by the offender.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are punishments that do not require jail time and there is an alternative offered to prison. This form of punishment is beneficial for many reasons. For one, it creates more space in jail so that there is room for individuals that committed more severe cases. By not sending these individuals to jail, there is a very large amount of money that is saved as well. I believe that there is not a single form of punishment that can be applied for every case. I think that punishment should be determined on a case by case basis. No two cases are the same. There is always going to be different ways that the crime happened, different motivations for the crime happening and different details of each crime. Therefore, there isn’t one specific punishment that can apply for every single crime.

 
 

  1. Intermediate punishments are in between probation and prison. Two common examples are day reporting and electronic monitoring (Abadinsky, 2015). The idea behind intermediate punishments is to provide a scale for punishments to better suit all individuals rather than those on the lower end of criminality and those on the upper end. Intermediate punishments are able to effectively and fairly provide punishment for those in the middle that may not be at the level of prison but deserve more than probation. Being that there are more than one type of crime, there should be more than one type of punishment. With that being said, for crimes that do not hurt others, like non-violent drug offenses, then the individual’s punishment should be positive, to help them better themselves and get them back on the right track. Then, if an individual commits a crime that may hurt another, they should have a mixture of punishment, and positivity. Lastly, if the individual shows to be relentless in their endeavors to hurt or even kill others, they should receive the punishment, with very little positivity.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are half and half. This includes incarceration and parole. Intermediate punishments allows for offenders to be released due to overcrowding. Intermediate punishments holds purpose in many different aspects. The punishment I find to be more practical is being incarcerated. This gives the feeling of a lack of freedom which can give offenders time to turn their life around.

 
 
 

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Intermediate punishments are used as a more severe punishment. While also allowing the individual to not be incarcerated behind bars. The purpose of these punishments is to allow for more space to be open in jails for more severe cases. As well as save money by not having an individual be in jail. I believe the best form of punishment depends on the case. If an individual was arrested on drug charges, perhaps their punishment should be completing a drug abuse course. While also passing drug tests.

 

  1. Intermediate sanctions are criminal penalties that do not include jail time or probation. Rather, intermediate sanctions fall in the middle of these types of punishments and offer an alternative to them. Intermediate sanctions are intended to provide judges with more flexibility when directing sentences (Intermediate Sanctions: Definition, Types, Pros & Cons, 2017). According to Abadinsky (2015), the stated explanation for intermediate punishments is a classical emphasis matching the sanction to the offense, while the actual purpose is to reduce incarceration. Some types of Intermediate sanctions include but are not limited to the following:  House arrest, fines, close monitoring, community service, electronic monitoring, and living in a monitored residential community. In my opinion, I do not think one punishment is better or more practical than the other and I believe that to determine that it depends on the severity of the crime that had been committed by the offender.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are punishments that do not require jail time and there is an alternative offered to prison. This form of punishment is beneficial for many reasons. For one, it creates more space in jail so that there is room for individuals that committed more severe cases. By not sending these individuals to jail, there is a very large amount of money that is saved as well. I believe that there is not a single form of punishment that can be applied for every case. I think that punishment should be determined on a case by case basis. No two cases are the same. There is always going to be different ways that the crime happened, different motivations for the crime happening and different details of each crime. Therefore, there isn’t one specific punishment that can apply for every single crime.

 
 

  1. Intermediate punishments are in between probation and prison. Two common examples are day reporting and electronic monitoring (Abadinsky, 2015). The idea behind intermediate punishments is to provide a scale for punishments to better suit all individuals rather than those on the lower end of criminality and those on the upper end. Intermediate punishments are able to effectively and fairly provide punishment for those in the middle that may not be at the level of prison but deserve more than probation. Being that there are more than one type of crime, there should be more than one type of punishment. With that being said, for crimes that do not hurt others, like non-violent drug offenses, then the individual’s punishment should be positive, to help them better themselves and get them back on the right track. Then, if an individual commits a crime that may hurt another, they should have a mixture of punishment, and positivity. Lastly, if the individual shows to be relentless in their endeavors to hurt or even kill others, they should receive the punishment, with very little positivity.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are half and half. This includes incarceration and parole. Intermediate punishments allows for offenders to be released due to overcrowding. Intermediate punishments holds purpose in many different aspects. The punishment I find to be more practical is being incarcerated. This gives the feeling of a lack of freedom which can give offenders time to turn their life around.

 
 
 

Law homework help

/in /by
  1. Intermediate punishments are used as a more severe punishment. While also allowing the individual to not be incarcerated behind bars. The purpose of these punishments is to allow for more space to be open in jails for more severe cases. As well as save money by not having an individual be in jail. I believe the best form of punishment depends on the case. If an individual was arrested on drug charges, perhaps their punishment should be completing a drug abuse course. While also passing drug tests.

 

  1. Intermediate sanctions are criminal penalties that do not include jail time or probation. Rather, intermediate sanctions fall in the middle of these types of punishments and offer an alternative to them. Intermediate sanctions are intended to provide judges with more flexibility when directing sentences (Intermediate Sanctions: Definition, Types, Pros & Cons, 2017). According to Abadinsky (2015), the stated explanation for intermediate punishments is a classical emphasis matching the sanction to the offense, while the actual purpose is to reduce incarceration. Some types of Intermediate sanctions include but are not limited to the following:  House arrest, fines, close monitoring, community service, electronic monitoring, and living in a monitored residential community. In my opinion, I do not think one punishment is better or more practical than the other and I believe that to determine that it depends on the severity of the crime that had been committed by the offender.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are punishments that do not require jail time and there is an alternative offered to prison. This form of punishment is beneficial for many reasons. For one, it creates more space in jail so that there is room for individuals that committed more severe cases. By not sending these individuals to jail, there is a very large amount of money that is saved as well. I believe that there is not a single form of punishment that can be applied for every case. I think that punishment should be determined on a case by case basis. No two cases are the same. There is always going to be different ways that the crime happened, different motivations for the crime happening and different details of each crime. Therefore, there isn’t one specific punishment that can apply for every single crime.

 
 

  1. Intermediate punishments are in between probation and prison. Two common examples are day reporting and electronic monitoring (Abadinsky, 2015). The idea behind intermediate punishments is to provide a scale for punishments to better suit all individuals rather than those on the lower end of criminality and those on the upper end. Intermediate punishments are able to effectively and fairly provide punishment for those in the middle that may not be at the level of prison but deserve more than probation. Being that there are more than one type of crime, there should be more than one type of punishment. With that being said, for crimes that do not hurt others, like non-violent drug offenses, then the individual’s punishment should be positive, to help them better themselves and get them back on the right track. Then, if an individual commits a crime that may hurt another, they should have a mixture of punishment, and positivity. Lastly, if the individual shows to be relentless in their endeavors to hurt or even kill others, they should receive the punishment, with very little positivity.

 

  1. Intermediate punishments are half and half. This includes incarceration and parole. Intermediate punishments allows for offenders to be released due to overcrowding. Intermediate punishments holds purpose in many different aspects. The punishment I find to be more practical is being incarcerated. This gives the feeling of a lack of freedom which can give offenders time to turn their life around.

 
 
 

Criminal homework help

/in /by

Do you know someone were involved in a diversion program (e.g., teen court, traffic court, etc).  What were the procedures?  Were there sanctions?  How did involvement impact the person?  What were the perceptions?  Did the individual engage in similar behavior later?  If so, how long after?  If not, why not?  Given the concept of net-widening, should there be intervention for those who engage in minor offenses or should they be left alone as eventually they will desist?
Is home confinement with electronic monitoring a deterrent?  Are there negatives to being confined to one’s home?  What type of person should be on home confinement?
Many programs exist that are not faith-based that received funding prior to President Bush’s faith-based initiative.  Many believe that such programs receive less funding or have less access to more funding as they do not fit the requirements to receive funding under the faith-based initiative.  Given the proposition that there is no evidence that faith-based treatment programs are any more or any less effective in reducing crime than are secular treatment programs, should the initiative and office developed under the Bush Administration be dispensed and funds distributed among secular and faith-based grant offices?  Or should the initiative remain as it provides common ground of treatment between conservatives and liberals?  Additionally, determine if students have a preference for the type of faith that is funded (e.g., Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, etc).  What are the reasons they may have preferences?  Address religious biases as needed.
Drug courts seemingly have a positive effect on those who are processed through them.  Other focused and well-designed programs include mental health courts and domestic violence courts, should there be specialty courts/units for other crimes or behaviors?  What crimes?  Why?
In order to understand the racial profiling debate and how certain communities may perceive unfair treatment, students should address if they believe they are profiled based on age and treated differently by campus and/or local police departments.
Should certain categories of drugs be decriminalized?  What might the impact be – in the short- and long-term?
Is sexting an overreach?  Are there other behaviors that should be considered an overreach of the criminal law?