The Case Information Of The Pre Trial Meetings And Trials Scheduled

After the Supreme Court review the Wong Sun v United States case, the Supreme Court found that “Wong Sun statement could not be used to corroborate the second defendant’s police statement and the second defendant’s statement could not corroborate Wong Sun’s statement because neither statement was made during the existence of drug conspiracy” (Ingram p.89). Therefore, the Court conclude that the defendants of Wong Sun v United States case deserved a “new trial because there remained no admissible evidence against them” (Ingram

Morris, 331 N.W.2d 48, 53 (N.D. 1983)); Florida v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d 412, 414 (Fla. 2012) (discussing the difference between actual and constructive possession); Brent v. State, 957 N.E.2d 648, 648, 652 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (holding that the defendant did not have actual or constructive possession of a bag of drugs located on the ground, beside a vehicle, that the defendant was in); Hunter v. Commonwealth, 690 S.E.2d 792, 794, 799 (Va. 2010) (holding that the evidence would have supported a charge of constructive possession of a firearm when the defendant/passenger stated that the gun located in the driver’s glovebox was his, but he was not charged with that crime); Martinez v. State, 152 P.3d 1237, 1243 (Idaho Ct. App. 2007) (holding that the defendant’s case must be reversed because he was not aware of the required mental state to plead guilty to constructive possession); Campbell v. People, 73 P.3d 11, 14 (Colo. 2003) (holding that the State must prove that the accused had actual or constructive possession of the drug); Washington v. McPherson, 46 P.3d 284, 291 (Wash. 2002) (holding that the defendant had actual possession of drugs found in another person’s pocket under the accomplice liability theory); Sims v. Alabama, 733 So. 2d 926, 929 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998) (holding that the defendant had actual possession of the drugs located under the driver’s seat of a vehicle he

PER REPORTER: Richard was arrested on 6/17/2015. The reporter said Graysin told her that “daddy went to jail and I was with him”. Richard was arrested for possession of a control substance. It is unknown by the reporter what kind of control substance. Per reporter Richard’s girlfriend Amanda was arrested on 1/1/2015 for a felony charge for possession of a control substance. It is unknown where Graysin was during the time of her arrest. It is unknown by the reporter is Garysin has been hurt or harm due to Richard and Amanda having possession to control substances. It is unknown if the substances are been manufactured in the home. It is unknown if Graysin has access to the substances. It is unknown if they are using the substance around Graysin.

7/26/16 – a pre-determination meeting was held with Shane, in the presence of his Union Representative, Tom Brice, to discuss the allegation that he violated the Dept. of Transportation and Public Facilities Employee Conduct Policy and Procedure #02.01.020 when he demonstrated disrespectful behavior towards his supervisor upon receiving a recent letter of suspension dated July 11, 2016.

A: Standing to sue is the requirement that plaintiffs who sue must have a serious and vetted interest in a case, meaning the plaintiff has sustained or is in danger of sustaining a direct and substantial injury from the actions of the other(which can be the government)

v. Oakes’ case, the presence of the narcotic drug on the accused illustrates a legal challenge of creating a balance on whether the accused intended to traffic the drug or not (Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada, 2017). Therefore, due to the proof that the accused possessed the drugs, an assumption emanates of the accused intention of engaging in trafficking such that he may be found guilty. However, the case may favor him if he opposes the assumption using various probabilities (Judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada, 2017). The same situation applies to Clarke’s case, by which the basis for his arrest was that he was found at the playground and was in possession of a camera and hence guilty. However, if he opposes the assumption by presenting various probabilities on why he was at the playground and why he was in possession of the camera, then the case might favor

Apply the Exclusionary rule to each of these three items of evidence and state whether or not the item should be excluded from evidence based on the Exclusionary Rule. If you selected any that WOULD be excluded, please explain why.

However, rooming house owner, Bessie Brewer said in her April 4, 1968 interview, Ray didn't ask for a room on the north side or check the

This case involves the suspect being arrested for H&S 11377(a)-Crystal Methamphetamine and three outstanding arrest warrants.

On Tuesday, September 20th I sat down in the Brookings City and County Court to observe just over two hours of court operations. The first case was a felony that took place on the 10th of August, 2015. The defendant was escorted to the center table and took a seat next to his attorney. The judge then stated the defendant’s crime, which was an offence of forgery. The defendant was read his rights, such as the right to an attorney, speedy trial, to remain silent, and so forth. The judge then described the case as where and when it took place. The defendant cashed a payroll check of $661.17 at Brookings Hy-Vee. The offender purchased a lottery ticket and some dog food, the rest was given in cash. All of this was caught on tape, and Hy-Vee notified

Based on our communication, please find attached information in regard of payments for your court cost in General session court. Please address your payment to Clerk of Court/General Session, PO Box 8002, Anderson, SC 29622. If you wish to receive a recipe, please sent return envelope with you

B.J. submitted the subpean that was issued with regard to the patient listed above. I am unable to attend the court hearing on 6/8/2017 because of the following: 1. the travel distance and 2. the time. Even though, I have someone that can pick up my children off the bus on occasions since her mother's car accident, it is not always guaranteed. Can you please reach out to the Attorney General and advise them of this matter and see whether or not a report is acceptable based on the request.

The Affidavit of Probable Cause was prepared by Officer S. White. Ofc. White was patrolling his sector when he observed a black sedan with an expired temporary license and an illegal window tint. Ofc. White conducted a traffic stop in a nearby parking lot. A black male named Terrence Noel exited the driver’s door and walked to the rear of the vehicle. Noel proceeded to drop a clear plastic filled with 14 grams of marijuana. Ofc. White called for assistance. Ofc. White then asked the driver for his license and Noel stated that he did not have his driver’s license because he was under suspension. Ofc. White reported that while speaking to Noel, Noel seemed to be extremely nervous and shook uncontrollably; simultaneously, Ofc. T. Duncan and Ofc.

However, as a public body, the Office has been held subject to scrutiny and critique in the media. The Law Society of South Australia has recently called for the creation of an external body to review prosecutorial decisions (McGregor-and-Fewster-2015). It has been noted that prosecutors poor decision-making and erroneous attitude, regarding cases where there is no reasonable prospect of securing a conviction, results in unnecessary delays in the court system and the substantial, irrecoverable loss of public funds (Yang-2013).

I am contacting you today to inform you of the judge’s decision to postpone your trial until the next trial calendar. We can’t express enough how upset we are at the judge’s decision. We know that you are seeking closure and we want the same thing.