Criminal Law & Procedure for the Paralegal: A Systems Approach
James W. H. McCord
Language: English
Pages: 627
ISBN: 0766819655
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
This comprehensive text explores the role of the paralegal in criminal law. It places the student in a law office setting with the instructor as supervising attorney. The text provides sample cases that track through the system. The student works through a criminal case from intake interviews through sentencing and appeal, while performing the tasks required of a criminal law paralegal. The instructor's manual offers teaching strategies, tests, and answer keys as well as a computerized test bank. This complete package provides everything students need to understand how a criminal law office works.
The Bible, the School, and the Constitution: The Clash that Shaped Modern Church-State Doctrine
The Bible, the School, and the Constitution: The Clash that Shaped Modern Church-State Doctrine
Eighth Circuit reversed all of O’Hagan’s convictions. Liability under 10(b) and Rule 10b–5, the Eighth Circuit held, may not be grounded on the “misappropriation theory” of securities fraud on which the prosecution relied. . . . II We address first the Court of Appeals’ reversal of O’Hagan’s convictions under § 10(b) and Rule 10b–5. Following the Fourth Circuit’s lead, see United States v. Bryan 58 F.3d 933, 943–959 (1995), the Eighth Circuit rejected the misappropriation theory as a basis for §
involving federal banking regulations, securities laws, and others. Military personnel are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and if they are accused of a crime, they are tried by military tribunals (courts-martial). Jurisdiction ■ 31 probation: a judicial sentence that permits a convicted person to remain free as long as that person meets the conditions imposed by the court. parole: release awarded to prison inmates after they serve some of their prison sentence. 32 ■
Cal. Rptr.2d 731 (Cal. 1996). 95 Aguilar v. Texas, 84 S.Ct. 1509 (1964). 317, 318 Aguilar, U.S. v., 967 F.2d 111 (5th Cir. 1992). 144 Aguilar, U.S. v., 883 F.2d 662 (9th Cir. 1989). 235 Agurs, U.S. v., 96 S.Ct. 2392 (1976). 44 Ake v. Oklahoma, 105 S.Ct. 1087 (1985). 486 Akins v. U.S., 679 A.2d 1017 (D.C. App. 1996). 309 Albers, U.S. v., 226 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2000). 57 Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board, 86 S.Ct. 194 (1965). 367, 372 Alford, North Carolina v., 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970).
U.S.C.A. §§ 1111 and 1112, which define first degree murder, felony murder, and manslaughter; 18 U.S.C.A. § 1114, which gives federal courts jurisdiction over murders of specified United States officers such as federal judges, CIA agents, and national park rangers carrying out their duties; 18 U.S.C.A. § 1116, which includes the killing of foreign officials; and 18 U.S.C.A. § 2332, which includes killing United States citizens in international terrorism. The phrase “while engaged in, or on
the crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person” [28 U.S.C.A. § 994]. The Supreme Court wrote in Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993) that enhanced sentences for hate crimes are justified, because “bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest.” In 2002 12,073 law enforcement agencies participated in
