...Case Citation: Kentucky v. King, 131 S. Ct. 1849, 563 U.S. 452, 179 L. Ed. 2d 865 (2011). Parties: Hollis King v. the State of Kentucky Facts: Officers of the Lexington, Kentucky Police Department set up a “controlled buy” of crack cocaine, then tracked the person they had watched do so and suspected of selling drugs to an apartment. They smelled marijuana and knocked on the door that seemed appropriate and asked for entry. Before the door was opened they heard noises that sounded like someone trying to get rid of the evidence, so they entered by force. The people inside were smoking marijuana; Hollis King was among them, along with cash, powdered cocaine, and drug paraphernalia. The apartment the suspected drug dealer actually entered turned out to be next door, but this was what they found in the apartment they entered with no warrant. Kentucky v. King, 131 S. Ct. 1849, 563 U.S. 452, 179 L. Ed. 2d 865 (2011). Procedural History: Hollis King was taken to court in Kentucky, where he entered a conditional guilty plea when he went to...
Words: 660 - Pages: 3
...Case Citation: Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. ___ (2011) Parties: Kentucky/ Petitioner Hollis Deshaun King/ Respondent Facts: Law enforcement officers began following a suspect who sole crack cocaine to a police informant during a sting operation. The police followed the suspect into an apartment complex and lost contact with him. As the police entered the complex, they detected the odor of marijuana coming from an apartment and mistakenly believed that suspect entered the apartment. After the police knocked on the door and announced their presence, they heard noises coming from inside their apartment to which they believed to be the suspect destroying evidence. The destruction of evidence is an exigent circumstance that justifies a warrantless entry. The officers announced their intentions prior to entering the apartment and discovering King with others smoking marijuana. The suspect that they were pursuing was not inside the apartment. Upon apprehension, officers conducted a plain view search followed by...
Words: 674 - Pages: 3
...1. Case Citation: Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. _ (2011) 2. Parties: Kentucky, Plaintiffs/Appellants King, Defendant/Appellee 3. Facts: Police officers in Lexington, Kentucky, followed a drug dealer to an apartment complex. The police smelled marijuana outside an apartment complex, knocked loudly and announced their outside. Once the officers began knocking they heard noises coming from the apartment; the officers believe that these noises were consistent with the destruction of evidence. The officers than processed to announce their intent to enter the apartment, kicked in the door, found respondent and others. During the protective sweep the saw drugs out in the open in the apartment and found additional evidence during a subsequent search. “The Circuit Court denied respondent’s motion to suppress the evidence, holding that exigent circumstances – the need to prevent destruction of evidence – justified the warrantless entry.” (2) Respondent...
Words: 691 - Pages: 3
...claim protection under the Fourth Amendment, individuals must show in a court of law expectation of privacy, which is to say an expectation that is recognized as reasonable under the circumstances. Kentucky v. King 563 U.S. 452 (2011) is just one of many cases in which the defendant exercises their rights under the Fourth Amendment. Kentucky v. King 563 U.S. 452 (2011) In the case of Kentucky v. King the Fourth Amendment was the main argument. The courts...
Words: 981 - Pages: 4
...Name of Case: Skilling v. United States Page: 133 Court/Year: U.S. Supreme Court 2010 Facts: The government accused Skilling and other in a wide-ranging scheme to deceive the investing public. Skilling was indicted with more than 25 counts of securities fraud. The government felt that Skilling benefited “profited from the fraudulent scheme” at the time of trial. According to 1346, Skilling did not commit honest-services fraud. Federal district court jury found Skilling guilty of 19 counts including the honest-services-fraud charge and sentenced him to 292 months in prison and ordered him to pay $45 million. U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court granted Skilling’s request that it hears the case. Final verdict: Fifth Circuit’s ruling upholding conspiracy conviction vacated; case remanded for further proceedings. Name of Case: Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States Page: 137 Court/Year: U.S. Supreme Court 2005 Facts: Andersen audited Enron’s publicly filed financial statements and provided internal audit and consulting services to the corporation. Andersen team had allowed Enron to engage in “off-balance-sheet” for accounting purposes so that it reflected positive returns, which is a violation under GAAP. Later, an Andersen partner began to destroy documents when he was instructed not to because it was against the policy. Andersen was indicted for intentionally persuading its employees to destroy documents. They violated Title 18 of the United...
Words: 1024 - Pages: 5
...Exigent Circumstances to Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment to The Constitution of the United States Kirk H. Andersen Park University July 2012 Abstract One of the greatest rights the Founding Fathers of the United States of America gave to its citizens was the right against unreasonable search and seizure. This right is guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. When this right is abridged by the government, what recourse does the citizen have to try and right this wrong? The appellate court system, up to the United States Supreme Court, was created to protect citizens rights. However, the courts have found, that under certain circumstances the government is capable of executing a search or seizure without a warrant as the Fourth Amendment so requires. This paper addresses exigent circumstances to search and seizure. Exigent Circumstances to Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment to The Constitution of the United States The Constitution of the United States is the basic document that governs the citizens of the United States of America. The framers of the Constitution wrote it with deep emotions in response to how the American Colonies had been treated under the British Crown. The Fourth Amendment, in particular, to protect citizens from unreasonable search and seizure, was written in response to how the colonist had been subject to writs of assistance, which were warrants that British Customs Officers and soldiers...
Words: 1654 - Pages: 7
...Facts: King was arrested and charged with first degree drug trafficking and a second degree felony for being a persistent felony offender after police pursued a suspect selling crack cocaine to undercover officers outside of an apartment complex. After the sale took place, undercover police officers pursued the suspect, who entered one of two apartments. One apartment smelled strongly of marijuana smoke so police assumed this was the apartment of entry. Upon banging on the door and announcing their presence, and failure of the occupant to answer the door, they could hear what sounded like people moving things around inside leading officers to believe evidence was being destroyed. Given the circumstance, officers announced their entry and kicked the door in to prevent the destruction of evidence. Upon entering, they found the defendant and two other people inside with cocaine and marijuana in plain view. Since the illegal drugs were in plain view, officers proceeded to search the premises without a warrant under the presumption of probable cause in which they found more drugs and drug paraphernalia. King claims the evidence should be suppressed because the police infringed upon his Fourth...
Words: 1076 - Pages: 5
...Fourth Amendment Summary Jesus Lozano-McNeely Alonso Butts, Blair Smith CJA/364 Criminal Procedures University of Phoenix Mr. Dennis Dougan September 15, 2014 Fourth Amendment Summary Team C will define and explain the common law background of the Fourth Amendment. This paper will break down the basic terminology of the Fourth Amendment in which protects persons, house, paper and effects. From unreasonable search and seizures. Search warrant on a Person A search warrant gives the law enforcement officers permission to search for certain evidence in a specific place. Without a search warrant, police officers may not search a place without its owner’s consent or if the evidence is in plain view. It is supported by the Fourth Amendment “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Law. Cornell 2012)”. A search warrant is granted by courts where a judge needs to sign of it if he or she thinks the warrant is necessary. The officers must have probable cause when trying to obtain a warrant. When officers put in for a warrant, judges may issue the search warrant. To obtain a warrant, an officer must show that the search is justified and should have sworn statements that support their...
Words: 1176 - Pages: 5
...Case Name: FLORIDA, Petitioner v. Joelis JARDINES Citation: 133 S.Ct. 1409 Procedural History: Defendant, who was charged with trafficking in cannabis and theft of electricity, moved to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that was obtained after a dog-sniff on front porch of defendant's home. The Florida Circuit Court, Miami–Dade County, William Thomas, J., granted the motion. State appealed. The Florida District Court of Appeal, 9 So.3d 1, reversed and certified a conflict. The Florida Supreme Court, Perry, J., 73 So.3d 34, quashed the decision of the District Court of Appeal. Certiorari was granted. Statement of Facts: In 2006, Detective William Pedraja of the Miami–Dade Police Department received an unverified tip that marijuana was being grown in the home of respondent Joelis Jardines. One month later, the Department and the Drug Enforcement Administration sent a joint surveillance team to Jardines' home where the dog gave a positive alert for narcotics. Based on the alert, the officers obtained a warrant for a search, which revealed marijuana plants; Jardines was charged with trafficking in cannabis. The Supreme Court of Florida approved the trial court's decision to suppress the evidence, holding that the officers had engaged in a Fourth Amendment search unsupported by probable cause. Issues: Was there a trespassory invasion of curtilage that constituted a search for fourth amendment purposes? Did officers have an implied license for the physical...
Words: 561 - Pages: 3
...160 Ohio App.3d 634; Ricker v. Fraza/Forklifts of Detroit; | |[pic] |[pic] |Page 634 |[pic] | RICKER, Appellant v. FRAZA/FORKLIFTS OF DETRIOT, Apellee. [Cite as Ricker v. Fraza/Forklifts of Detriot, 160 Ohio App.3d 634, 2005-Ohio-1945] 2005-Ohio-1945 Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District, Franklin County. No. 04AP-582 Decided April 26, 2005 LAZARUS, Judge. {¶1} Plaintiff-appellant, J. Griffin Ricker, appeals from a decision of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, dismissing his complaint against defendant-appellee, Fraza/Forklifts of Detroit ("Fraza"), for lack of personal jurisdiction. {¶2} Ricker initiated this action with a complaint seeking damages for breach of an oral contract to provide insurance consulting services. The complaint alleges that Ricker is an insurance consultant with his principal place of business located in Hilliard, Ohio, and Fraza is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Roseville, Michigan. The complaint further alleges that, in 2002, Fraza hired Ricker to provide insurance consulting services, and agreed to pay Ricker $30,000 if business insurance was obtained through the efforts of Ricker. Such payments would apply to subsequent annual renewals of insurance. Ricker obtained insurance coverage for Frazer from Universal Underwriters Group for 2002. Fraza paid Ricker for his consulting...
Words: 2359 - Pages: 10
...murdered the Huguenots at Fort Caroline. Written sighs by the Spanish commander to the king as for why the settlers were hung stated “Scattering the odious Lutheran doctrine in these provinces”. A puritan dissident, Roger Williams in 1963 who was forbidden...
Words: 752 - Pages: 4
...her color. This was the change that needed to happen, and it did with the Brown v. Board of Education case. This case ended legal segregation in public schools, and gave people so much hope and courage. Brown and thirteen other Topeka parents filed a class action suit in 1951 against the Board of Education. Brown and the other parents finally decided to take action and stand up on behalf of their children. The suit was called to reverse the policy of racial segregation however the District Court ruled in favor of the Board of Education because of the case Plessy v. Ferguson. They told them that everything between the schools was equal and denied relief. However Brown did not stop there and went of to the Supreme Court. At the Supreme Court they combined Brown’s case with others such as Briggs v. Elliott, Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, Gebhart v. Belton, and Bolling v. Sharpe. As they went on to court with a battle that seemed impossible to win many might have asked did they need to go to Supreme Court. Brown had hope and belief that the rights he was so broadly told would be upheld. Brown need to go to court to gain his family the right to go to whatever school they wanted. Brown was a...
Words: 1033 - Pages: 5
...The Plessy V. Ferguson stands as one of the most pivotal moments in American legal history and shaped the course of civil rights and segregation in the U.S. This case was decided in 1896 as it established the doctrine of separate but equal which sanction racial segregation in public facilities. While seeking relief, the states were passing legislation that coded inequalities between races. These legislations stated that there would be separate schools for separate races. This case originated in 1892 as a challenge to the Louisiana Separate Car Act which was in 1890 the law required that all railroads operating in the state provide equal but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers and prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than...
Words: 860 - Pages: 4
...Uniforms in Public Schools Marla Downey Axia College of University of Phoenix COM 120 Effective Persuasive Writing Dr. Carla Lane February 21, 2007 Uniforms in Public Schools Think back to the age of adolescence, was there ever a comment made by other children on the way one dressed or did some teasing occur regarding the lack of current style? Was there an issue of being prejudged or stereotyped by others, including school faculty, based on the clothing one chose to wear? That was then, now remember how it felt. Times have changed and economic status plays such an important role in everyone’s lives, image how children of today feel. Social economics is a hard issue for adults to deal with and yet children are forced to deal with it on a daily basis in schools with their classmates, friends, and even their teachers. What solutions can be offered to change this bias for all children, regardless of age, race, and social status? One suggestion is to put school dress codes in place which would require school uniforms. School uniforms should be mandated in public schools because our children’s self esteem and education should not be determined by the clothes they wear. There is a nationwide campaign for the use of uniforms and the efforts are “gaining momentum”, states Susan Thomas (1994, p. 44). School systems are challenged with many issues, one being “ways to reduce competition over designer labels” (Thomas, 1994, p. 44). It is safe to say that both opponents...
Words: 1977 - Pages: 8
...Jacqueline Montanez Case On May 12, 1992 Jacqueline Montanez, a member of the Maniac Latin Disciples, was involved with the murders of rival Latin King gang members Hector Reyes and Jimmy Cruz in Humboldt Park, Chicago. According to police Montanez shot Reyes and then later gave her gun to Marilyn Mulero: who subsequently shot Cruz. The three women involved were arrested within 24 hours of the crime. This story made headlines for a couple reasons; for one it involved retaliation against male gang members by female gang members and also because Montanez was only 15 when she committed the crime. Since the severity of her crime was extreme, Montanez was prosecuted in an adult court as opposed to a juvenile court. It only took the jury two days to determine probable cause. Video evidence along with testimony Montanez gave police was enough for the jury to make a decision On August 6, 1993 Montanez, then 17, was convicted of two first degree murder charges by a Cook County Court jury. Under the law of accountability Montanez was not only responsible for her actions but for Mulero’s actions as well, thus the two counts of first degree murder. Montanez was later sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Since Montanez was 15 when the murders took place the death penalty was out of the question. Despite the fact that she was tried as an adult the death penalty could not be applied due to the Supreme Court case of Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988): which prohibited...
Words: 590 - Pages: 3
