This morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Birchfield v. North Dakota, a case consolidated with two others to address the following issue: in the absence of a warrant, can a state make it a crime for a person to refuse to take a chemical test to detect the presence of alcohol in the person’s blood?
“DUI in South Carolina – Piecing It All Together,” is an insightful guide for drivers with information covering: The Law of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Driving With An Unlawful Alcohol Concentration (DUAC); The Legal Process – Your Rights Before, During, and After Arrest; Administrative Implied Consent Hearings & License Suspension; Field Sobriety Tests; The DMT DataMaster Breath Test Machine; Blood Tests; Penalties & Costs for a DUI; Preparing for Court; How to be an Effective Witness; and Much More. Visit http://www.charlestonlaw.net/charleston-dui-defense-lawyer/ for more info.
More case on casting a ballot, redistricting and race arrived at North Carolina's Supreme Court on Monday, as judges started choosing if two protected changes ought to be struck down on the grounds that legislators who put them on the polling form were chosen a debt of gratitude is in order for misshaped region limits.
https://uii.io/emariarr123
Expungement Presentation – Gang Intervention ConferenceRecordGone
Attorneys from the Foundation, Natasha Buchanan and Mathew Higbee, provided information during two separate breakout session at the Orange County Education Departments Gang Intervention Conference on April 29, 2011. The conference was attended by approximately 500 leaders in the effort to help reduce crime and help people transition out of gangs.
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Congolese presidential and parliamentary electoral system.
FDA auditors gave the DRC an overall electoral score of 3.75%. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum score attainable.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Cameroon's republic presidential electoral system
FDA auditors gave Cameroon an overall electoral score of 2.5%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
The 2012 FDA electoral fairness audit of Alberta's legislative level of government uses new matrices in the audit process as outlined to the Research Methodology section of the report. These matrices are more comprehensive of electoral systems than previous FDA audits, and therefore, the use of the new matrices may result in higher electoral fairness scores.
FDA auditors measured Alberta with a 54% overall electoral fairness score. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum and reasonably attainable score.)
“DUI in South Carolina – Piecing It All Together,” is an insightful guide for drivers with information covering: The Law of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Driving With An Unlawful Alcohol Concentration (DUAC); The Legal Process – Your Rights Before, During, and After Arrest; Administrative Implied Consent Hearings & License Suspension; Field Sobriety Tests; The DMT DataMaster Breath Test Machine; Blood Tests; Penalties & Costs for a DUI; Preparing for Court; How to be an Effective Witness; and Much More. Visit http://www.charlestonlaw.net/charleston-dui-defense-lawyer/ for more info.
More case on casting a ballot, redistricting and race arrived at North Carolina's Supreme Court on Monday, as judges started choosing if two protected changes ought to be struck down on the grounds that legislators who put them on the polling form were chosen a debt of gratitude is in order for misshaped region limits.
https://uii.io/emariarr123
Expungement Presentation – Gang Intervention ConferenceRecordGone
Attorneys from the Foundation, Natasha Buchanan and Mathew Higbee, provided information during two separate breakout session at the Orange County Education Departments Gang Intervention Conference on April 29, 2011. The conference was attended by approximately 500 leaders in the effort to help reduce crime and help people transition out of gangs.
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Congolese presidential and parliamentary electoral system.
FDA auditors gave the DRC an overall electoral score of 3.75%. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum score attainable.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Cameroon's republic presidential electoral system
FDA auditors gave Cameroon an overall electoral score of 2.5%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
The 2012 FDA electoral fairness audit of Alberta's legislative level of government uses new matrices in the audit process as outlined to the Research Methodology section of the report. These matrices are more comprehensive of electoral systems than previous FDA audits, and therefore, the use of the new matrices may result in higher electoral fairness scores.
FDA auditors measured Alberta with a 54% overall electoral fairness score. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum and reasonably attainable score.)
Guidelines on reciprocity or admission on motion among the states as per amer...LawCrossing
Of the 50 states and five territories listed on the chart “Reciprocity, Comity & Attorneys Exam” in the ABA's Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements 2011, 25 states participate in a form of reciprocity.
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Syria federal electoral system.
FDA auditors gave Russia an overall electoral score of 35%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
U.S. Electoral Fairness Report revised as of April 11, 2013
Executive Summary
The American federal electoral system borders a failed state as determined by the overall unsatisfactory audit score of 54.5 percent (out of 100 percent). The FDA auditors measured
1) two failing scores for legislation pertaining to electoral finance (48.25 percent) and media election content (42.5 percent);
2) one unsatisfactory score for legislation pertaining to candidates and parties
(57 percent);
3) one satisfactory score for legislation pertaining to voters (70.25 percent).
The FDA auditors factored in 52 independent variables and used matrices and financial spreadsheets in its calculations and determinations. Based on its measurements, the FDA believes that the American federal election outcomes may not reflect the voice of Americans from electoral districts. The significant legislated unfair competition between American candidates and parties coupled with electoral finance legislation favoring wealthy money interests and media legislation favoring large corporate media and imbalanced election coverage creates a system tilted heavily to special and minority interests, rather than the American people. The FDA believes that reforms are necessary in electoral finance and election coverage in order to help realign the American federal electoral process with Americans as a whole. The FDA recommends, for examples, expenditure limits on congressional candidates and privately funded presidential candidates, caps on independent third-party expenditure, caps on media ownership concentration, and a voluntary media code of conduct during the 60 day campaign period which supports impartial and balanced campaign coverage of all registered candidates and parties.
The FDA recommends that the public get involved with the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.
“If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in government to the utmost.”
- Aristotle
2011 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Report on the United States Federal Electoral System.
FDA auditors gave the US an overall grade of 30%. (50% minimum passing grade.)
2011 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit of Spain's federal electoral system
FDA auditors gave Spain an overall electoral fairness score of 42.25%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Afghan's Islamic Republic electoral system
FDA auditors gave Afghanistan an overall electoral score of 23.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
Ohio Emerging Property Management Issues by Attorney Theresa MorelliTheresa Morelli
My presentation helps residential landlords with 2 topics: (1) Ohio's new medical marijuana law and (2) for all landlords, HUD's 2016 notice on the use of criminal records and criminal background screening of prospective renters
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the France's republic electoral system
FDA auditors gave France an overall electoral score of 91.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the highest grade attainable.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Canadian federal electoral system.
FDA auditors gave Canada an overall electoral score of 25.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Iraq's federal electoral system
FDA auditors gave Iraq an overall electoral score of 35.25%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
The measures adopted by the Chamber of Deputies on November 29, 2016 that disfigured the Anti-Corruption project of law dramatically increase the disbelief of the Brazilian population in relation to politicians and political institutions in Brazil, which is a great mark of our time. This disbelief may pave the way for the breaking of the ill-fated democratic process in Brazil with the introduction of an exception regime in the midst of growing popular dissatisfaction. Popular dissatisfaction with politicians results from the fact that most candidates for elected office in Brazil are not driven by the public interest, that is, to promote political, economic, and social changes for the benefit of the population. This is evidenced in the acts of the Brazilian National Congress and members of the Executive Power self-protecting from “Lava Jato Operation” which investigates corruption crimes and the government Michel Temer and his allies in the Brazilian National Congress by approving measures such as PEC 241 / PEC 55 that threaten the interests of the Brazilian population.
The 2012 FDA electoral fairness audit of Alberta's legislative level of government uses new matrices in the audit process as outlined to the Research Methodology section of the report. These matrices are more comprehensive of electoral systems than previous FDA audits, and therefore, the use of the new matrices may result in higher electoral fairness scores.
FDA auditors measured Alberta with a 54% overall electoral fairness score. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum and reasonably attainable score.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Bolivia's presidential and parliamentary electoral system
FDA auditors gave Bolivia an overall electoral score of 78.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is maximum grade.)
Method for determining exhaustion of an electrochemical gas sensorSherry Huang
A method by which an oxygen measuring instrument can test the functionality of the oxygen sensor. Oxygen sensors of the galvanic type operate by consumption of an internal easily oxidizable anode, such as lead or cadmium.
Automatic rearview mirror system using a photosensor arraySherry Huang
The light sensing device comprises a photosensor array having a field of view encompassing a rear window area and at least a portion of at least one side window area of the vehicle.
Guidelines on reciprocity or admission on motion among the states as per amer...LawCrossing
Of the 50 states and five territories listed on the chart “Reciprocity, Comity & Attorneys Exam” in the ABA's Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission Requirements 2011, 25 states participate in a form of reciprocity.
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Syria federal electoral system.
FDA auditors gave Russia an overall electoral score of 35%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
U.S. Electoral Fairness Report revised as of April 11, 2013
Executive Summary
The American federal electoral system borders a failed state as determined by the overall unsatisfactory audit score of 54.5 percent (out of 100 percent). The FDA auditors measured
1) two failing scores for legislation pertaining to electoral finance (48.25 percent) and media election content (42.5 percent);
2) one unsatisfactory score for legislation pertaining to candidates and parties
(57 percent);
3) one satisfactory score for legislation pertaining to voters (70.25 percent).
The FDA auditors factored in 52 independent variables and used matrices and financial spreadsheets in its calculations and determinations. Based on its measurements, the FDA believes that the American federal election outcomes may not reflect the voice of Americans from electoral districts. The significant legislated unfair competition between American candidates and parties coupled with electoral finance legislation favoring wealthy money interests and media legislation favoring large corporate media and imbalanced election coverage creates a system tilted heavily to special and minority interests, rather than the American people. The FDA believes that reforms are necessary in electoral finance and election coverage in order to help realign the American federal electoral process with Americans as a whole. The FDA recommends, for examples, expenditure limits on congressional candidates and privately funded presidential candidates, caps on independent third-party expenditure, caps on media ownership concentration, and a voluntary media code of conduct during the 60 day campaign period which supports impartial and balanced campaign coverage of all registered candidates and parties.
The FDA recommends that the public get involved with the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.
“If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in government to the utmost.”
- Aristotle
2011 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Report on the United States Federal Electoral System.
FDA auditors gave the US an overall grade of 30%. (50% minimum passing grade.)
2011 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit of Spain's federal electoral system
FDA auditors gave Spain an overall electoral fairness score of 42.25%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Afghan's Islamic Republic electoral system
FDA auditors gave Afghanistan an overall electoral score of 23.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
Ohio Emerging Property Management Issues by Attorney Theresa MorelliTheresa Morelli
My presentation helps residential landlords with 2 topics: (1) Ohio's new medical marijuana law and (2) for all landlords, HUD's 2016 notice on the use of criminal records and criminal background screening of prospective renters
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the France's republic electoral system
FDA auditors gave France an overall electoral score of 91.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the highest grade attainable.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the Canadian federal electoral system.
FDA auditors gave Canada an overall electoral score of 25.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Iraq's federal electoral system
FDA auditors gave Iraq an overall electoral score of 35.25%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum grade.)
The measures adopted by the Chamber of Deputies on November 29, 2016 that disfigured the Anti-Corruption project of law dramatically increase the disbelief of the Brazilian population in relation to politicians and political institutions in Brazil, which is a great mark of our time. This disbelief may pave the way for the breaking of the ill-fated democratic process in Brazil with the introduction of an exception regime in the midst of growing popular dissatisfaction. Popular dissatisfaction with politicians results from the fact that most candidates for elected office in Brazil are not driven by the public interest, that is, to promote political, economic, and social changes for the benefit of the population. This is evidenced in the acts of the Brazilian National Congress and members of the Executive Power self-protecting from “Lava Jato Operation” which investigates corruption crimes and the government Michel Temer and his allies in the Brazilian National Congress by approving measures such as PEC 241 / PEC 55 that threaten the interests of the Brazilian population.
The 2012 FDA electoral fairness audit of Alberta's legislative level of government uses new matrices in the audit process as outlined to the Research Methodology section of the report. These matrices are more comprehensive of electoral systems than previous FDA audits, and therefore, the use of the new matrices may result in higher electoral fairness scores.
FDA auditors measured Alberta with a 54% overall electoral fairness score. (0% is the lowest score attainable; 50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is the maximum and reasonably attainable score.)
2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Bolivia's presidential and parliamentary electoral system
FDA auditors gave Bolivia an overall electoral score of 78.75%. (50% is the minimum passing grade; 100% is maximum grade.)
Method for determining exhaustion of an electrochemical gas sensorSherry Huang
A method by which an oxygen measuring instrument can test the functionality of the oxygen sensor. Oxygen sensors of the galvanic type operate by consumption of an internal easily oxidizable anode, such as lead or cadmium.
Automatic rearview mirror system using a photosensor arraySherry Huang
The light sensing device comprises a photosensor array having a field of view encompassing a rear window area and at least a portion of at least one side window area of the vehicle.
Interference compensating ndir gas sensor for measuring acetyleneSherry Huang
A gas sample separated from transformer oil is circulated through an NDIR gas sensor system which obtains an acetylene concentration by calculating a detected acetylene concentration obtained by an absorption biased (“AB”) NDIR acetylene gas sensor.
Two detector elements are optically isolated by having them mounted (die-attached) on the same header so that the thermal tracking of the detectors respectively for the signal and reference channels is close to ideal.
This discussion of the operating principles of capacitive, resisitive, and thermal conductivity humidity sensors also addresses their advantages, disadvantages, and applications.
U.S. Supreme Court Case Essay 1. The following presentation is i.docxmarilucorr
U.S. Supreme Court Case Essay
1. The following presentation is intended to help students complete the Supreme Court case essay assignment for Criminal Law.
2. Choose a Supreme Court case that interests you. You may choose any case on a criminal law topic heard by the Supreme Court of the United States to research and write an essay about it. One good case to review is Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. ____ (2016).
3. Research the details about the case (answer the 5 research questions: Who, What, When, Where and Why). Take notes about what you discover. Note the sources of your information. You must list your sources at the end of the essay in BlueBook citation format, proper footnotes in Bluebook format throughout the essay, and properly cite the sources of each piece of information in the essay itself. For details on how to do this, please review the Legal Studies Program Writing Guide in the APUS Library. Of course you can also use the Bluebook, and you may ask your professor for assistance as required.
4. After researching a case, organize the information you have collected by making an outline. A basic structure for organizing your information might be as follows.
A. Introduction:
1. Identify the name of the case and when it was heard before SCOTUS.
2. Identify the parties involved in the case.
3. Briefly describe the focus of the case.
B. Describe the case itself: What was the controversy in the case?
C. How did the case move through the courts before reaching SCOTUS?
1. What court had original jurisdiction in the case?
2. How had previous courts ruled in the case?
D. What did the Supreme Court rule in the case?
1. What was the argument of the majority opinion?
2. What was the argument of the minority opinion?
E. What was the reasoning used by the Supreme Court to reach its decision? How did it reach its decision?
E. Conclusion: How does the Court’s ruling in the case affect Americans today?
1. Has the Court’s ruling in the case affected other rulings in other cases?
2. Has the Court’s ruling affected the interpretation and enforcement of any particular laws, and how those laws are enforced?
3. If applicable: Has the Court’s ruling in this case affected you, or someone you know, personally?
10. Write your essay. If you organized your information based on the suggested outline, then all you have to do is write down what you have learned from your research, and put it into a footnoted two to three page essay. Your first paragraph is the introduction (the information under letter A of your outline). The second paragraph is the information under letter B, and so on.
11. Sources: Be sure to cite your sources, using sequentially numbered footnotes. That means any information you learned from another source, such as a website, a magazine article, a videotaped interview etc., must be properly noted in your essay. Make sure you use footnotes in proper BlueBook citation style. Footnotes appear at the bottom of ...
Judson, K., & Harrison, C. (20 16). Law and ethics for the h.docxtawnyataylor528
Judson, K., & Harrison, C. (20 16). Law and ethics for the
health professions. (7th ed. ). New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Law&Et cs
FOR HEALTH PROFESSIONS
KAREN JUDSON
CARLENE HARRISON
Key Terms
204
Privacy, Security,
and Fraud
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
LO 8. I Discuss U.S. constitutional amendments and privacy
laws that pertain to health care.
LO 8.2 Explain HIPAA's special requirements for disclosing
protected health information.
LO 8.3 Discuss laws implemented to protect the security
of health care information as health records are
converted from paper to electronic form.
LO 8.4 Discuss the federal laws that cover fraud and abuse
within the health care business environment and the
role of the Office of the Inspector General in finding
billing fraud.
LO 8.5 Discuss patient rights as defined by HIPAA, the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act, and other health
care entities.
FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF . ..
ANN, AN R.N. IN A TEXAS HOSPITAL FOR NEARLY 25 YEARS,
remembers when patients' names were posted on the doors to their
rooms. She and her colleagues once freely informed telephone call-
ers and visitors how patients were progressing. Now, Ann remarks,
because of federal legislation to protect the privacy and security of
health care information, times have changed. "We have to be so care-
ful about releasing any information that when my father's dear friend
was admitted to my floor in the hospital where I work, I couldn't tell
him that his friend had been admitted."
From Ann's perspective, because she cares about her patients, she
would like to be able to talk more freely with family members or friends
who also care about her patients. But she is duty-bound to follow the law,
and she knows the benefits to patients for laws that guard their privacy.
From the perspective of friends and family members who call for infor-
mation about a patient, the law is harsh and hard to understand. They are
often angry when they cannot learn the status of a friend or loved one.
From the perspective of some patients, the law sometimes feels over-
protective and unnecessarily intrusive, but for others-such as the patient
who has tried to commit suicide and failed, who doesn't want anyone to
know he is in the hospital, or the battered spouse who doesn't want her
abusive husband to find her-it's a safety net they can depend on.
The United States Constitution
and Federal Privacy Laws
Contrary to popular belief, the term privacy (freedom from unauthor-
ized intrusion) does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill
of Rights. However, the United States Supreme Court has derived
the right to privacy from the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and
Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
LO 8.1
Discuss U.S. constitutional
amendments and privacy laws
that pertain to health care.
privacy
Freedom from unaut horized int rusion.
LANDMA ...
Chiefs Counsel Chiefs Counsel Should Police Officers Wh.docxmccormicknadine86
Chief's Counsel
Chief's Counsel: Should Police Officers Who Lie Be Terminated as a
Matter of Public Policy?
By Elliot Spector, Attorney at Law; and Associate Professor, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
n September 5, 2007, the State of Washington published the first opinion holding that a police officer who
lies should be terminated as a matter of public policy. In Kitsap County Deputy Sheriff’s Guild v. Kitsap
County, the sheriff terminated Deputy LaFrance for untruthfulness and erratic behavior. An arbitrator agreed
that LaFrance had repeatedly been untruthful but was not convinced that termination was the proper form of
discipline; the arbitrator therefore ordered him returned to full duty. Eventually the case found its way to the
appellate court, which concluded that the arbitration award was unenforceable as against public policy.1 It relied
primarily on the sheriff’s conclusion that LaFrance was not fit for duty due to Brady concerns about his ability to
testify. In Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a prosecutor must release information
favorable to an accused upon request;2 therefore, if LaFrance were to testify in a criminal proceeding, the
prosecutor would be legally and ethically obligated to disclose his history of untruthfulness to defense counsel.
“Put simply, LaFrance’s proven record of dishonesty prevents him from useful service as a law enforcement
officer. To require his reinstatement to a position of great public trust in which he cannot possibly serve violates
public policy.”3
Supreme Court Rulings
The U.S. Supreme Court decision of United Paper Workers International Union v. Moscow, Inc., recognized
that a court might set aside an arbitration award if the arbitration award creates an explicit conflict with other
laws and legal precedents.4 The effect of this public-policy decision in Washington State is that if officers are
found to be intentionally untruthful, any appeal of their termination will be limited to the issue of whether the
untruthfulness was proven. If so, no arbitration panel or judicial authority will be able to reduce the penalty.
In order for the Washington court to overturn the arbitration award, they had to find an explicit, well-defined,
dominant public policy. To make such a finding, the court had to point to some case or statutory law that
created such a public policy. The Washington court turned to Brady without articulating the extensive case law
supporting its position.
Following Brady, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Giglio v. United States, held that when the reliability of a given
witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence, nondisclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls
within the rule that suppression of material evidence justifies a new trial irrespective of good faith or bad faith of
the prosecution.5Together, the Brady and Giglio decisions hold essentially that the credibility of a government
witness amoun ...
Chiefs Counsel Chiefs Counsel Should Police Officers Wh.docxbissacr
Chief's Counsel
Chief's Counsel: Should Police Officers Who Lie Be Terminated as a
Matter of Public Policy?
By Elliot Spector, Attorney at Law; and Associate Professor, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut
n September 5, 2007, the State of Washington published the first opinion holding that a police officer who
lies should be terminated as a matter of public policy. In Kitsap County Deputy Sheriff’s Guild v. Kitsap
County, the sheriff terminated Deputy LaFrance for untruthfulness and erratic behavior. An arbitrator agreed
that LaFrance had repeatedly been untruthful but was not convinced that termination was the proper form of
discipline; the arbitrator therefore ordered him returned to full duty. Eventually the case found its way to the
appellate court, which concluded that the arbitration award was unenforceable as against public policy.1 It relied
primarily on the sheriff’s conclusion that LaFrance was not fit for duty due to Brady concerns about his ability to
testify. In Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a prosecutor must release information
favorable to an accused upon request;2 therefore, if LaFrance were to testify in a criminal proceeding, the
prosecutor would be legally and ethically obligated to disclose his history of untruthfulness to defense counsel.
“Put simply, LaFrance’s proven record of dishonesty prevents him from useful service as a law enforcement
officer. To require his reinstatement to a position of great public trust in which he cannot possibly serve violates
public policy.”3
Supreme Court Rulings
The U.S. Supreme Court decision of United Paper Workers International Union v. Moscow, Inc., recognized
that a court might set aside an arbitration award if the arbitration award creates an explicit conflict with other
laws and legal precedents.4 The effect of this public-policy decision in Washington State is that if officers are
found to be intentionally untruthful, any appeal of their termination will be limited to the issue of whether the
untruthfulness was proven. If so, no arbitration panel or judicial authority will be able to reduce the penalty.
In order for the Washington court to overturn the arbitration award, they had to find an explicit, well-defined,
dominant public policy. To make such a finding, the court had to point to some case or statutory law that
created such a public policy. The Washington court turned to Brady without articulating the extensive case law
supporting its position.
Following Brady, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Giglio v. United States, held that when the reliability of a given
witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence, nondisclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls
within the rule that suppression of material evidence justifies a new trial irrespective of good faith or bad faith of
the prosecution.5Together, the Brady and Giglio decisions hold essentially that the credibility of a government
witness amoun.
Chapter 12 Searches, Seizures, and Arrests 447# 151053.docxbartholomeocoombs
Chapter 12: Searches, Seizures, and Arrests 447
# 151053 Cust: Cengage Au: Hall Pg. No. 447
Title: Criminal Law and Procedure Server: __________________
K
Short / Normal
DESIGN SERVICES OF
S4-CARLISLE
Publishing Services
In 2006, this decision was extended to parolees in Samson v. California,78 where
the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit suspicion-
less, warrantless searches of parolees. On the continuum of punishment, the Court
noted, a parolee enjoys less privacy than probationers and only slightly more than
prisoners. Significant to the Court in Samson was the consent of the parolees, who
were given the option of remaining in prison; the large number of parolees at large;
the interest of the state in monitoring parolees for reintegration; and recidivism. The
Court pointed to the likelihood of recidivism, as opposed to the general population,
in its Knights opinion as further support for the decision to subject probationers to
greater oversight.
Administrative Searches
Although outside the content of this text, be aware that so-called administrative
searches often require less than probable cause and a warrant to be conducted. This is
largely because the purpose of such searches is not to detect and punish criminals. In-
stead, it is to protect the public from health and welfare threats, the violation of which
are typically punished with fines, the disciplining of a license, or a similar noncriminal
sanction. For example, warrantless inspections of restaurants, groceries, other highly
regulated industries, public school students, and the work areas of public employees
must be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, even though probable cause is not
required for any of them.
In most instances, the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness requirement is satisfied
in the administrative context if there is either (1) reasonable suspicion or (2) a compre-
hensive regulatory scheme in place. If the latter, the scheme shall define the authority
of inspectors, define the inspection itself, and provide a rationale for the inspection.79
ArreST
One of the most serious interferences with a person’s liberty is to be physically seized
by a government. Equally, arrest plays an important role in effective law enforcement.
Because of the significant impact arrest has on a person’s life, the right to arrest is
limited by the Fourth Amendment.
Defining Arrest
Generally, an arrest is a deprivation of freedom by a legal authority. As you have already
learned, seizures by the police take two primary forms. First, at the lower end of the
spectrum is the Terry v. Ohio seizure. Such seizures occur whenever a person reasonably
believes that he or she is not free to leave. In addition, the seizure must be as brief as
possible and be of limited intrusion to the person detained. The Court addressed the
question whether passengers of vehicles are seized during traffic stops in the 2007 case
Brendlin v.
Chapter 3 Due Process, Equal Protection, and Civil Rights Those .docxchristinemaritza
Chapter 3 Due Process, Equal Protection, and Civil Rights
Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.
Abraham Lincoln
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter you should better understand:
· • The standards applied for determining whether a procedure satisfies the constitutional due process requirements
· • The manner in which the restrictions on federal government action in the Bill of Rights have been incorporated into the due process guaranty that applies to state actions
· • The U.S. Supreme Court’s approach to determining whether classifications violate the constitutional equal protection requirements
· • The classifications to which “strict scrutiny” is applied in the equal protection analysis
· • The basic remedies available for civil rights violations
At the heart of the rule of law lie the ideals that everyone should be treated fairly and equally before the law. Toward this end the U.S. Constitution protects individual rights by constraining government. But fairness and equality cannot be reduced to prohibitions. To reach more broadly the Constitution also includes fundamental guaranties. Many important court decisions and legislative acts addressing individual rights have been based on the two most fundamental general guaranties: the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause.
A Due Process Clause was part of the Fifth Amendment in the original Bill of Rights and it was aimed at the federal government. It provides that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process.” The original Bill of Rights did not mention equal protection of the laws in a general sense. The Fourteenth Amendment, added after the Civil War and aimed at former slave states, included the same due process provisions as the Fifth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment also included the Equal Protection Clause. It provides that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Although nothing in the text said that equal protection applied to the federal government as well as to the states, the U.S. Supreme Court eventually held that it did. In 1954 in Bolling v. Sharpe the Court said that “the concepts of equal protection and due process, both stemming from our American ideal of fairness, are not mutually exclusive. The ‘equal protection of the laws’ is a more explicit safeguard of prohibited unfairness than ‘due process of law,’ and, therefore, we do not imply that the two are always interchangeable phrases. But, as this Court has recognized, discrimination may be so unjustifiable as to be violative of due process.”1 Consequently due process and equal protection apply to both federal and state laws.
The Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses address government action. They require that laws and legal procedures be fair. As discussed in the final section of this chapter, other constitutional provisions or laws may directly address unfair or discriminato ...
Provided by Darren Chaker, this is an excellent publication concerning obtaining police records. Booking photographs to police report for all 50 states.
Resource Case Brief Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al. in C.docxdebishakespeare
Resource: Case Brief Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al. in Ch. 2, section 2-6, “Commerce Powers,” of the text.
Write a 700- to 1,050-word paper in which you define the functions and role of law in business and society. Discuss the functions and role of law in your past or present job or industry. Properly cite at least two references from your reading.
Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines.
Click the Assignment Files tab to submit your assignment.
CASE 2.1 Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al., 505 U.S. 504 (1992)
FACT SUMMARY Cipollone brought suit against
Liggett for violation of several New Jersey consumer
protection statutes alleging that Liggett (and other
cigarette manufacturers) were liable for his mother’s
death because they engaged in a course of conduct
including false advertising, fraudulently misrepresenting
the hazards of smoking, and conspiracy to deprive
the public of medical and scientific information about
smoking. Liggett urged the court to dismiss the state
law claims contending that the claims related to the
manufacturer’s advertising and promotional activities
were preempted by twCASE 2.1 Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al., 505 U.S. 504 (1992)
FACT SUMMARY Cipollone brought suit against
Liggett for violation of several New Jersey consumer
protection statutes alleging that Liggett (and other
cigarette manufacturers) were liable for his mother’s
death because they engaged in a course of conduct
including false advertising, fraudulently misrepresenting
the hazards of smoking, and conspiracy to deprive
the public of medical and scientific information about
smoking. Liggett urged the court to dismiss the state
law claims contending that the claims related to the
manufacturer’s advertising and promotional activities
were preempted by two federal laws: (1) the Federal
Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965, and
(2) the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1969.
SYNOPSIS OF DECISION AND OPINION The
U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Cipollone, holding
that his claims relying on state law were preempted by
federal law. The Court cited both the text of the statute
and the legislative history in concluding that Congress’s
intent in enactment of the laws was to preempt
state laws regulating the advertising and promotion of
tobacco products. Because Congress chose specifically
to regulate a certain type of advertising (tobacco), federal
law is supreme to any state law that attempts to
regulate that same category of advertising.
WORDS OF THE COURT: Preemption “Article VI of
the Constitution provides that the laws of the United
States shall be the supreme Law of the Land. Thus,
[. . .] it has been settled that state law that conflicts
with federal law is ‘without effect.’ [. . .] Accordingly,
‘the purpose of Congress is the ultimate touchstone’
of pre-emption analysis. Congress’s intent may be
‘explicitly stated in the statute’s language or implicitly
contained in its structure and purpose.’ In ...
This is the one that I use as example of planning the paper. The key to this slide is acknowledging the opposing side & addressing their concerns. That is what I want you to do in your papers.
Unveiling the Secrets How Does Generative AI Work.pdfSam H
At its core, generative artificial intelligence relies on the concept of generative models, which serve as engines that churn out entirely new data resembling their training data. It is like a sculptor who has studied so many forms found in nature and then uses this knowledge to create sculptures from his imagination that have never been seen before anywhere else. If taken to cyberspace, gans work almost the same way.
Skye Residences | Extended Stay Residences Near Toronto Airportmarketingjdass
Experience unparalleled EXTENDED STAY and comfort at Skye Residences located just minutes from Toronto Airport. Discover sophisticated accommodations tailored for discerning travelers.
Website Link :
https://skyeresidences.com/
https://skyeresidences.com/about-us/
https://skyeresidences.com/gallery/
https://skyeresidences.com/rooms/
https://skyeresidences.com/near-by-attractions/
https://skyeresidences.com/commute/
https://skyeresidences.com/contact/
https://skyeresidences.com/queen-suite-with-sofa-bed/
https://skyeresidences.com/queen-suite-with-sofa-bed-and-balcony/
https://skyeresidences.com/queen-suite-with-sofa-bed-accessible/
https://skyeresidences.com/2-bedroom-deluxe-queen-suite-with-sofa-bed/
https://skyeresidences.com/2-bedroom-deluxe-king-queen-suite-with-sofa-bed/
https://skyeresidences.com/2-bedroom-deluxe-queen-suite-with-sofa-bed-accessible/
#Skye Residences Etobicoke, #Skye Residences Near Toronto Airport, #Skye Residences Toronto, #Skye Hotel Toronto, #Skye Hotel Near Toronto Airport, #Hotel Near Toronto Airport, #Near Toronto Airport Accommodation, #Suites Near Toronto Airport, #Etobicoke Suites Near Airport, #Hotel Near Toronto Pearson International Airport, #Toronto Airport Suite Rentals, #Pearson Airport Hotel Suites
Affordable Stationery Printing Services in Jaipur | Navpack n PrintNavpack & Print
Looking for professional printing services in Jaipur? Navpack n Print offers high-quality and affordable stationery printing for all your business needs. Stand out with custom stationery designs and fast turnaround times. Contact us today for a quote!
The world of search engine optimization (SEO) is buzzing with discussions after Google confirmed that around 2,500 leaked internal documents related to its Search feature are indeed authentic. The revelation has sparked significant concerns within the SEO community. The leaked documents were initially reported by SEO experts Rand Fishkin and Mike King, igniting widespread analysis and discourse. For More Info:- https://news.arihantwebtech.com/search-disrupted-googles-leaked-documents-rock-the-seo-world/
Falcon stands out as a top-tier P2P Invoice Discounting platform in India, bridging esteemed blue-chip companies and eager investors. Our goal is to transform the investment landscape in India by establishing a comprehensive destination for borrowers and investors with diverse profiles and needs, all while minimizing risk. What sets Falcon apart is the elimination of intermediaries such as commercial banks and depository institutions, allowing investors to enjoy higher yields.
LA HUG - Video Testimonials with Chynna Morgan - June 2024Lital Barkan
Have you ever heard that user-generated content or video testimonials can take your brand to the next level? We will explore how you can effectively use video testimonials to leverage and boost your sales, content strategy, and increase your CRM data.🤯
We will dig deeper into:
1. How to capture video testimonials that convert from your audience 🎥
2. How to leverage your testimonials to boost your sales 💲
3. How you can capture more CRM data to understand your audience better through video testimonials. 📊
RMD24 | Debunking the non-endemic revenue myth Marvin Vacquier Droop | First ...BBPMedia1
Marvin neemt je in deze presentatie mee in de voordelen van non-endemic advertising op retail media netwerken. Hij brengt ook de uitdagingen in beeld die de markt op dit moment heeft op het gebied van retail media voor niet-leveranciers.
Retail media wordt gezien als het nieuwe advertising-medium en ook mediabureaus richten massaal retail media-afdelingen op. Merken die niet in de betreffende winkel liggen staan ook nog niet in de rij om op de retail media netwerken te adverteren. Marvin belicht de uitdagingen die er zijn om echt aansluiting te vinden op die markt van non-endemic advertising.
What is the TDS Return Filing Due Date for FY 2024-25.pdfseoforlegalpillers
It is crucial for the taxpayers to understand about the TDS Return Filing Due Date, so that they can fulfill your TDS obligations efficiently. Taxpayers can avoid penalties by sticking to the deadlines and by accurate filing of TDS. Timely filing of TDS will make sure about the availability of tax credits. You can also seek the professional guidance of experts like Legal Pillers for timely filing of the TDS Return.
What is the TDS Return Filing Due Date for FY 2024-25.pdf
Can you be punished for refusing to take a breath alcohol tester
1. Can you be punished for refusing to take a breath alcohol tester?| ISweek -
Industry sourcing
This morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Birchfield v. North Dakota, a
case consolidated with two others to address the following issue: in the absence of a
warrant, can a state make it a crime for a person to refuse to take a chemical test to
detect the presence of alcohol in the person’s blood?
In North Dakota, for instance, any individual who operates a motor vehicle on any public
or private road in the state is deemed to have consented to a chemical test of his or her
blood, breath, or urine for the purpose of determining any intoxication levels. In 2013, the
state amended this statute to make refusal to take the test directed by a police officer a
crime punishable in the same manner as driving under the influence (“DUI”). Minnesota,
the other respondent state in the case, has a similar law that makes it a criminal offense
for a driver who has been arrested on probable cause for driving while impaired to refuse
a chemical test. The United States, which has written an amicus brief on behalf of the
states, makes it a misdemeanor for anyone driving in the National Parks to refuse a
chemical test requested by an officer with probable cause to believe that a driver is
impaired.
North Dakota’s brief emphasizes the severe problem of drunk driving in the United
States: “Between 2005 and 2014, 112,998 people were killed in alcohol-impaired-driving
crashes.” In 2012, North Dakota had the highest drunk-driving death rate in the country,
with 11.3 deaths per 100,000 people. The state also explains that early laws criminalizing
drunk driving were difficult to enforce because of the evidentiary problem of proving that
drivers were intoxicated. But with the advent of new testing procedures, new laws were
passed that permitted the use of blood alcohol concentration (“BAC”) as evidence of
intoxication. Under these laws, prosecutors no longer had to prove actual impairment; a
BAC above a certain level was generally enough to secure a DUI conviction. To aid these
efforts, North Dakota imposed penalties—like revoking a driver’s license—on suspected
drunken drivers who refused to submit to chemical tests.
Yet legislators were still concerned with the numbers of impaired drivers who escaped
punishment by refusing chemical tests for alcohol and drugs. In 2011, 18.8 percent of
those arrested for driving under the influence (over 1,000 people) refused to take a
chemical test. These people were more difficult to prosecute criminally because of the
lack of concrete evidence to convict them. And the primary administrative punishment for
refusal (i.e., revoking their licenses) had little deterrent effect because offenders would
simply continue to drive without a license. Thus, the state decided to impose criminal
penalties on refusal to submit to a test. Minnesota’s brief explains that its law was also
enacted for similar reasons, to help combat “the terrible toll drunk drivers exact on
society.”
Danny Birchfield, the petitioner in the first case, drove his car off of the road in North
2. Dakota, and failed a field sobriety test administered by a highway patrol officer. A
preliminary breath test suggested that he was intoxicated; the officer placed him under
arrest and read him the state’s mandatory implied consent advisory, which informed him
that the law required him to submit to a chemical test, including a blood test, and that
failure to do so was a crime. Birchfield nonetheless refused to submit, and was charged
accordingly. He moved to dismiss the charge, arguing that it was unconstitutional under
the Fourth Amendment for a state to criminalize refusal to submit to a chemical test of a
driver’s blood. A court denied his motion to dismiss. That decision was upheld by the
North Dakota Supreme Court, which ultimately found that the law was constitutional.
But Birchfield disagrees. He argues that the criminal penalty imposed by North Dakota
punishes a person’s refusal to surrender their right under the Fourth Amendment to resist
an unwarranted search. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Missouri v. McNeely (2013),
held that “in drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the
bloodstream does not constitute an exigency in every case sufficient to justify conducting
a blood test without a warrant.” Thus, as the Birchfield brief states, “we assume all agree
that a State may not subject people to criminal sanctions for exercising rights granted
them by the Constitution—which means, in the context here, that a person may not face
criminal penalties for refusing to submit to a search that is not authorized by a warrant or
permissible under an exception to the warrant requirement.” But that is what North
Dakota and other states have done: made it a crime for persons suspected of DUI to
decline to submit to warrantless chemical tests, which cannot be squared with McNeely.
Birchfield states that these criminal test-refusal penalties are unreasonable because they
apply even when the person prosecuted for refusal to submit to a warrantless search was
not charged with—or, indeed, was acquitted of—driving while impaired.
The American Civil Liberties Union—which was counsel of record in McNeely—filed an
amicus brief supporting Birchfield. The ACLU concedes that drunk driving “is a serious
threat to public safety. But the disputed statutes in this case do not criminalize drunk
driving. They criminalize the assertion of a constitutional right. And that is something the
government cannot do.” Since these chemical tests are searches under the Fourth
Amendment, declining to submit to a warrantless search falls squarely within the ambit of
that constitutional provision. An individual has a constitutional right to refuse to consent to
such a search and insist that the police obtain a warrant. Therefore, the ACLU argues,
the government cannot criminalize that conduct.
But North Dakota insists that, by definition, the Fourth Amendment is not implicated
unless there is a search; because Birchfield never took a test, the state says, he was
never actually “searched.” In the companion case Bernard v. Minnesota (in which the
petitioner Bernard did consent to a breath test but only after being told of the criminal
penalties for refusal) Minnesota also argues that, per the Court’s decision in United
States v. Robinson (1973), there is a bright-line rule that police officers may, without a
warrant, always conduct a full search of a person who has been lawfully arrested. In
Bernard, the Minnesota Supreme Court relied on the rule from Robinson to hold that a
3. warrantless breath test of a suspect lawfully arrested for driving while impaired does not
violate the Fourth Amendment because it is a search incident to lawful arrest. So,
because a police officer can compel a suspect to submit to a breath test, it does not
violate the Fourth Amendment to criminally charge the suspect for refusing to take the
test.
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) filed a brief on behalf of the respondent states,
citing its support for enforcement efforts aimed to end drunk driving, like the laws at issue
here. MADD argues that “nothing in the Constitution or in the Court’s jurisprudence
requires a per se ban on all criminal penalties in this area.” Since the Supreme Court has
upheld the right of states to impose administrative penalties—like license revocation, in
South Dakota v. Neville (1983)—for refusing to submit to a test, in this case “the critical
question is not whether a state may penalize an arrested driver’s refusal to consent to a
warrantless BAC test,” but rather “what ‘penalty’ or ‘significant consequences’ a state
may choose” in order to further its “compelling” interest in trying to reduce the damage
caused by drunk driving. And Fourth Amendment cases often reject categorical rules in
favor of a case-by-case analysis based on the “totality of circumstances.” MADD
therefore argues that the Court should “continue to permit state legislatures in the
federalism laboratory to experiment with the most effective mix of incentives to reduce
and ultimately end the undisputed scourge of drunk driving.”
The states also build upon this point: even if the law does intrude upon the Fourth
Amendment, the intrusion is justified due to the states’ compelling interest in protecting
public roadways. Meanwhile, a breath test, for instance, is only “minimally intrusive.” And
as Minnesota argues, its law is “carefully tailored to meet the government’s interest in
combating drunk driving”; an officer can only request a breath test from a suspect after
the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect is driving while impaired. Therefore,
the law really only comes into play against a subset of people that the government has a
great interest in obtaining a breath test from, because it already has good reason to
believe they are driving drunk.
Finally, as the United States brief reiterates, the states are not actually forcing a person
to submit to a test, but are just conditioning permission to drive on consent to testing. “No
blanket ban exists on conditioning government benefits on search requirements,” the
United States asserts. Birchfield and the ACLU have argued that driving is so necessary
(especially in rural states like North Dakota) that “it is impermissibly coercive for a State
to attach test conditions to it,” but the government responds that the Supreme Court has
treated the right to drive as a paradigmatic privilege to which states may attach
conditions: “The relevant condition here is that, in exchange for the privilege of driving,
the driver relinquishes any right to refuse a chemical test under certain limited conditions.
Given the validity of that condition, the use of traditional state enforcement mechanisms
to secure compliance cannot be considered disproportionate.” And criminal enforcement
is a better alternative to nonconsensual, or forcible, chemical testing, which could result
in violent confrontations.
4. The Supreme Court first examined the issue of forcible bodily testing in Rochin v.
California (1952), where the Court held that forcibly pumping the stomach of a criminal
suspect in order to extract evidence—two capsules of drugs which the person had
swallowed—constituted a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment (this was pre-Mapp v. Ohio (1961), in which the Court incorporated the
Fourth Amendment against the states). Such conduct “shocks the conscience,” the Court
said, and constituted “methods too close to the rack and the screw to permit of
constitutional differentiation.” Several years later, in Breithaupt v. Abram (1957), the Court
distinguished Rochin, and found that a forcible blood test of a DUI suspect “taken by a
skilled technician [does] not . . . ‘shock[] the conscience.’”
In 1966, the Court decided Schmerber v. California, in which it examined the chemical
test issue under the Fourth Amendment for the first time. While Schmerber was
hospitalized after an accident, his BAC was tested, and he was convicted of DUI based
on the test. The Court ruled that the test did constitute a search or seizure under the
Fourth Amendment, but that it was reasonable under an exigency exception: because of
the natural metabolization of alcohol in the bloodstream, an immediate test was needed
to preserve the evidence, and was allowable. The Court, citing Breithaupt, also
emphasized the reasonableness and “ordinariness” of a blood test conducted in a
hospital setting.
In 2013, however, Justice Sonya Sotomayor wrote the Court’s 5-4 plurality decision in
McNeely, which distinguished its decision in Schmerber. In McNeely, the defendant had
been arrested for DUI after failing field sobriety tests, but he refused to take a breath test;
the arresting officer then transported him to a hospital where his blood was forcibly
withdrawn. McNeely moved to suppress the blood test as being unconstitutionally
obtained without a warrant. Missouri tried to argue that, based on Schmerber, drawing
McNeely’s blood was per se constitutional without a warrant under the exigency
exception.
But Sotomayor’s opinion emphasized that a blood draw constitutes an invasion of bodily
integrity that implicates an individual’s “most personal and deep rooted expectations of
privacy.” And as opposed to Schmerber, which was decided in 1966, getting a warrant
isn’t as difficult today; the state’s position in McNeely failed “to account for advances in
the 47 years since Schmerber was decided that allow for the more expeditious
processing of warrant applications, particularly in contexts like drunk-driving
investigations where the evidence offered to establish probable cause is simple.” Despite
this, the Court did rule, however, that certain exigent circumstances could allow for a
warrantless BAC test, but this should be examined on a case-by-case basis. And the
Court noted that the opinion did not “undermine the governmental interest in preventing
and prosecuting drunk-driving offenses,” maintaining that states have “a broad range of
legal tools to enforce their drunk-driving laws and to secure BAC evidence without
undertaking warrantless nonconsensual blood draws.”
5. In Birchfield, the Court will have to decide whether implied consent to chemical testing
laws with criminal sanctions for refusal are one of these constitutional tools.
ISweek(http://www.isweek.com/)- Industry sourcing & Wholesale industrial products
6. In Birchfield, the Court will have to decide whether implied consent to chemical testing
laws with criminal sanctions for refusal are one of these constitutional tools.
ISweek(http://www.isweek.com/)- Industry sourcing & Wholesale industrial products