ESSAY ON CRIMINAL LAW

QUESTION

Criminal Litigation

Section I: True/False (1 point each)

1. An insufficient translation of Miranda warnings for a non–English-speaking suspect is irrelevant.
2. A New York Times survey indicates that the death penalty is not a general deterrent to homicide.
3. Appeal waivers are not allowed as part of plea bargains.
4. The Constitution requires jury verdicts to be unanimous.
5. Jurors may be removed by challenge for cause if they will automatically vote either for or against the death penalty.

Section II: Multiple Choice (1 point each)

6. Improperly obtained confessions are barred from use at trial by the

7. Appeals function to do all except

8. Miranda rules apply

9. Three strikes laws provide sentences that are usually

10. Presence of counsel is required at

Essay

Subsection A: Pretrial Identification, Confession and Trial

  One night while on routine patrol, Officer Reyna Luthor observed a red Chevy Corvette sports car with one headlight out, a clear violation of a traffic law. Luthor proceeded to execute a traffic stop and approached the driver to issue a citation. Following the standard police procedure, Luthor asked the driver for his license and registration. The license identified the driver as one Otis Wade. As Wade handed his license and registration to Luthor, he said with menace that he “would make her regret it” if she “messed” with him.

Luthor took the license and registration back to her car and began writing a citation. As she was preparing it, she heard a police APB (all points bulletin) on the radio to BOLO (be on the lookout) alert for a red sports car driven by a male, about 5’8″ tall, 150 pounds, clean-shaven, with dark hair, and wearing glasses, dark pants with a pink puff-sleeved shirt unbuttoned down to the navel. This person was wanted for robbery of Kate Mettler, whose purse had just been taken. Wade was actually 5’9″ tall, 160 pounds, clean-shaven, with dark hair, and wore glasses, blue trousers and a rose-colored, puff-sleeved shirt buttoned up to the neck.

Luthor placed Wade under arrest for robbery and read him his Miranda warnings. Wade invoked his rights to remain silent and to counsel. Luthor turned Wade over to other police officers who had arrived at the scene. She then searched Wade’s car and discovered a purse under the seat.

One hour after Wade was arrested, Mettler identified Wade as the robber in a one-on-one confrontation at the police station. Wade did not have an attorney present at the identification. Mettler said that she was positive in her identification. She also identified the purse found in Wade’s car as hers. Wade was again given Miranda warnings. This time he waived his rights and confessed to the robbery, and was then formally charged with robbery and is awaiting trial.

11.       How should the court rule on Wade’s pretrial motions, to exclude his statement to Officer Luthor at the scene of the arrest, the identification of Wade by Mettler at the police station, as well as the purse seized from Wade’s car?

Subsection B: Plea Bargaining and Speedy Trial/Ethics

Your client in 1989 was charged in state warrants with possessions of cocaine with intent to distribute and with possession of drug paraphernalia. His matter was placed on the district court docket six times in a row but not heard. On the sixth time in district court, the State moved to continue. The judge denied the motion and dismissed the two cases for failure to prosecute. On both warrants the district judge wrote that he was dismissing the cases for failure of the State to prosecute.

In 1992, three years later, the State obtains a multi-count indictment against your client based upon the same transaction as the 1989 charges. The new indictment charges possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and possession of drug paraphernalia.  What motions, if any, would you file in an effort to get this indictment dismissed?

Subsection C: General

Falk and Hawthorne work together on an assembly line.

Falk had a reputation for arguing and fighting and, in fact, had engaged in a fight with another employee several weeks prior. The fact that Falk had engaged in this fight was known by Hawthorne.

On the day in question, Hawthorne was accused numerous times by Falk of not performing his job correctly. Falk was verbally abusive to Hawthorne. Hawthorne asked his supervisor whether he, in fact, had done anything wrong on the job and his supervisor said he had not. He also asked his supervisor if he could tell Falk to quit harassing him. The supervisor told Falk exactly that. Falk, however, continued to verbally harass Hawthorne.

Finally, Hawthorne walked around the assembly table to within one foot of Falk and asked Falk if he had a problem with him. Falk said, “Yeah, I have a problem. You don’t do your job right. You have a problem with me?” Hawthorne then said, “Yeah, I have a problem. You have a big mouth.” Falk, who was cutting packages at the time and wielding a six inch packing knife, swung around towards Hawthorne with knife in hand, but made no appreciable effort to move the knife towards Hawthorne’ stomach, although it was level with his stomach and pointing directly at it. When Falk began to turn, Hawthorne hit him in the face, knocking Falk down.

Falk’s head hit the cement floor and he died. The autopsy showed that without question, the death was caused by Falk’s head hitting the floor and not the blow to Falk’s face.

With what, if anything, can Hawthorne be charged, and what is the likelihood of conviction? Be sure to include discussion of any defenses Hawthorne may have available.

SOLUTION

L057

But you can order it from our service and receive complete high-quality custom paper.  Our service offers Law  essay sample that was written by professional writer. If you like one, you have an opportunity to buy a similar paper. Any of the academic papers will be written from scratch, according to all customers’ specifications, expectations and highest standards.”