Define the following terms and/or any requirements/tests/applications that pertain to them: Plain View: 1. Plain view is any illegal item that is within the sight of an officer. __ Anything that in plain view of an officer can be seized without a warrant and won’t intrude on anybodies fourth amendment rights.__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Horton v. California was the leading case on the plain view doctrine. This case states that if an officer finds any evidence in plain view the find has to be completely accidental.
Unfortunately there was none available, so the court decided to have him put in Giobault School for Boys. Charles, twelve, remained for a brief period of time before running away to his mother, who would reject him. Thus, he ran away yet again, igniting a lifelong career of crime. He lived on the streets and made money by thievery. Charles was arrested in Indiana and escaped from a juvy center after just four days confinement, getting away in a stolen car.
does not constitute a court order sufficient to override the presumption of paternity. Likewise, we find that failure on the part of Darlene Romer to respond to a request for admission under Civil Rule 36 admitting that Richard Romer is not the biological father of R.M., does not constitute clear and convincing evidence to rebut paternity, in the opposite, the superior court finding that “the plaintiff is not the father of R.M. and owes no support” is clearly erroneous because it makes no mention of the standard of proof it used as opposed to that set out in AS 25.20.050 Legitimation by subsequent marriage, acknowledgment in writing, or
I did a little extra research over the movie just to get some of the other facts maybe they couldn’t put in the movie because of length. Clarence Brandley is an African-American who, in 1981, while a janitor at a high school in Conroe, Texas, was wrongly convicted of the rape and murder of Cheryl Dee Ferguson, a 16 year-old student. Brandley was held for nine years on death row. After lengthy legal proceedings that ended in the Supreme Court of the United States, Clarence Brandley was freed in 1990. Suspicion immediately fell on two of the custodians, Brandley and Henry (Icky) Peace, who had found the body.
. . This court, however, has rejected mere "speculative reasoning" as a basis for proving access, especially when intermediaries are involved. Id. Reasoning that amounts to nothing more than a "tortuous chain of hypothetical transmittals" is insufficient to infer access.
Accordingly, National was not required to offer underinsured motorist coverage to drivers under the self-insured statute, which requires only self-insurers to provide uninsured motorist coverage. Further, under its rental agreement, National was required to provide underinsured motorist coverage only if the vehicle was involved in an accident in a state that had mandatory underinsured motorist coverage that could not be rejected by any means. In Ohio, the coverage is rejectable. In accordance, the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of National and against Metropolitan. Estate of Ralston v. Metro.Prop.&Cas.Ins146 Ohio App.3d 630 (2001) 2001-Ohio-3478 In our case, just as in Estate of Ralston, Sage Rent-A Car was self-insured under the provisions of R.C.4509.62, and R.C.4509.72 (a)(b), excluding them from liability.
He was charged with robbery, bail was set for $10,000. The murder charges were held until his sanity could be proved. The Judge determined that Gein should be held at Central State for 30 days, for an evaluation. And on 23 December 1957 Judge Bunde announced that the psychiatrists had declared Gein insane. He was committed to Central State and stayed there until 1968, when he was found fit to stand trial.
The trial judge denied the defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The question in this case is that did the defendant in this circumstances, and evidence had a duty to provide the security against any criminal act as the one that happened? So we
If that individual argued to the court that a motorcycle is not a "vehicle," then the court would have to interpret the statute to determine what the legislature meant by vehicle and whether the motorcycle fell within that definition and was covered by the statute. There are numerous rules of statutory interpretation. The first rule and most important rule is the rule dealing with the statute's plain language. This rule essentially states that the statute means what it says. If, for example, the statute says "vehicles," then the court is going to assume it means vehicles and not "planes" or something else.
Any individual caught driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated was subject to a punishment of not more than thirty days and not less than seven days as a first time offender. A second time offender was subject to punishment not exceeding three months and not less than one month. A repeat offender with more than two separate incidences getting charged with the same offence will face a punishment not less than three months and not over one year. In 1930 impaired driving became a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown could decide whether he or she wants to precede the case by summary conviction or indictment. The punishments were not changed for hybrid convictions, however indictment conviction punishments were