Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Go to advanced search...

Brief a case - Essay Example

Comments (0) Cite this document
He appealed his conviction and sentence in the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Facts: The appellant was arrested and charged…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER97.3% of users find it useful
Brief a case
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample "Brief a case"

Bell v Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, 2003 Legal History: The appellant was convicted and sentenced on a charge of attempted kidnapping in the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida. He appealed his conviction and sentence in the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Facts: The appellant was arrested and charged with attempted kidnapping after the victim, who was hysterical, telephoned the police. Once the police responded to the victim’s telephone call, it took up to twenty minutes for the victim to calm down enough to make a statement. In her statement, the victim reported that she had been approached by the appellant from his van as she walked along the street earlier in the day. The appellant offered to take her to where she was going. She did not accept the offer and continued walking. She then saw the victim standing next to his van. The appellant took the victim by the neck at gun point in an attempt to get her into his van against her will. However, the victim was able to free herself and ran home, where she telephoned the police.
Legal Issues: Did the trial err in its decision to allow the victim’s hearsay statement via a police officer under the hearsay exception relative to excited utterances?
Holding: The judgment of the lower court was affirmed and therefore the appellant’s appeal was dismissed.
Legal Reasoning: Pursuant to Florida Statute Section 90.803(2) (2001), an excited utterance is an exception to the rule against hearsay when the statement/excited utterance relates to a “startling event or condition” and is made while the maker of the statement/excited utterance “is under duress” (Bell v State, 2003). An excited utterance is made when the event causing excitement is “startling enough to cause excitement” (Bell v State, 2003). The statement is required to have been made “before there was time to contrive or misrepresent” (Bell v State, 2003). The statement must also be made when the speaker is “under the stress of excitement caused by the event” (Bell v State, 2003). In order to be an excited utterance, it is not necessary for the statement be made in a manner contemporaneous to the event causing excitement. All that is necessary for establishing an excited utterance is that the speaker is excited when the statement is made. Pursuant to Section 90.803(2) an excited state of mind may persist for a while following the event. It is for the court to determine whether or not the statement was made in an excited state. In determining whether or not the speaker made the statement in an excited state of mind the court may consider the speaker’s age, mental and physical conditions, the event itself and the contents of the statement. According to the responding officer’s evidence, the victim was clearly hysterical and scared when he arrived at her home. She was too upset to speak initially. Thus the trial court was at liberty to conclude that the victim’s state of mind was one of duress and excitement emanating from the event that she described to the officer. Even if the judge had erred, the error did not cause irreversible harm since the victim testified, providing the appellant with ample opportunities to cross-examine the victim relative to the veracity of the statement given to the police.
United States v Napier
Court of Appeal, 9th Circuit, 1975
Legal History: The appellant was convicted by a jury on four counts of interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle pursuant to 18 USC Section 2312 known as the Dyer Act and one count of interstate kidnapping pursuant to 18 USC Section 1201 known as the Lindbergh Act. The appellant appealed against his conviction.
Facts: The appellant was alleged to have kidnapped a woman in Oregon and taken her to Washington and had driven the victim’s stolen car to Oregon again. The evidence revealed that the victim was discovered unconscious, suffering from serious head injuries near Vancouver, Washington. A broken firearm was discovered near her body and her blood and hair were matched to blood and hair found on the weapon’s hammer. The appellant’s fingerprints were found on the weapon’s barrel. Tire tracks near the scene matched those of the victim’s car. The car was subsequently recovered in Oregon. The appellant’s fingerprints were found on the victim’s car and his personal documents were also discovered in the victim’s purse which was found in the victim’s car. The victim was admitted into hospital and had brain surgery and was said to have suffered brain damage and was therefore incapable of testifying. Her sister testified that a week following the victim’s release from the hospital she was shown a newspaper article with the appellant’s picture. The victim’s immediate reaction was to point at the appellant’s picture and state in “great distress and horror and upset”, “he killed me, he killed me” (US v Napier, 1975).
Legal Issues: Did the court err in allowing an out-of-court statement by the victim into evidence as a “spontaneous exclamation” and thus an exception to the rule against hearsay? (US v Napier, 1975).
Holding: The appellant’s appeal is without merit and was accordingly dismissed and the judgment of the lower court affirmed.
Legal Reasoning: The court expressed the view that the statement allegedly made by the victim fall within the hearsay exception of either an excited utterance of a spontaneous exclamation. Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 803(2) any statement relative to a “startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition” is an exception to the rule against hearsay (US v Napier, 1975). The appellant argued that the statement was made in reference to the assault and therefore was not a spontaneous exclamation. The court reasoned however, that the victim’s statement was made in response to the appellant’s photograph and that was the qualifying startling event, thus the statement was a spontaneous exclamation. Therefore the victim’s statement in response to the photograph is sufficient to constitute the spontaneous exclamation exception to the rule against hearsay. Although spontaneous exclamations usually apply to accidents, assaults and such events, it is not restricted to these types of incidents. The court will look at the specific facts and circumstance of the case. Since the victim had not previously discussed the assault with her family, her response to the appellant’s photograph would amount to a spontaneous exclamation. She was “unexpectedly” shown a picture of the man who assaulted her and thus her response was spontaneous and not one that could be said to have been contrived. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
(“Brief a case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2”, n.d.)
Brief a case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2. Retrieved from
(Brief a Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words - 2)
Brief a Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words - 2.
“Brief a Case Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words - 2”, n.d.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment or rate a document


Financial Reporting on Enron

18 Pages(4500 words)Case Study

Brief a case

...Melvin Washington vs. of Indiana Facts of the Case  Police Officer Danny Reynolds, who works for the Indianapolis Metropolitan upon seeing a vehicle with a damaged headlight, approached the car to speak to the driver, Washington. Upon reaching the vehicle the officer inquired whether there were any weapons present onboard. Washington admitted to having a handgun, which was located under the driver’s seat. He also informed Officer Reynolds that he had a valid license for the weapon. Washington was handcuffed and upon discovering the weapon under the seat the Officer also found a bag of marijuana that was next to the handgun. Despite the presence of a valid handgun permit the officer issued Washington a summons to show in...
1 Pages(250 words)Case Study

Love brief a case

... v. Sands Supreme Court of Ohio, 2008 Legal History: The appellant appealed against his conviction and sentence in the Lake County Court of Common Pleas for engaging in corrupt activities, attempted murder and aggravated arson targeting public officers. Facts: In April 2006, Jason Green, a friend of the appellant reported to a police detective that the appellant and his girlfriend were planning to kill four public officers. On the facts, Green and the appellant had suffered several encounters with local police and the Mayor and were of the opinion that they were deliberately targeting and harassed by the police. The duo purchased recording equipment and recorded conversations with officials with a view to proving harassment... v. Sands...
2 Pages(500 words)Essay

Brief a case

..., if the court errs in determining the expertise of a specific expert witness pursuant to the definition provided in Rule 702, the conviction will not be overturned if the error was harmless (United States v Carrazana, 921 F.2d 1557 (11th Cir. 1991). The expert witness testified to drug language and schemes characteristic of the illegal drug trade. The appellate court ruled that courts have allowed Drug Enforcement Officers to testify as experts relative to drug trades language and schemes. In this case the appellate court was satisfied that the expert witness, as a Drug Enforcement Officer had the necessary training, experience and skill to testify as an expert to such matters. It has already been ruled that an...
4 Pages(1000 words)Essay

Brief a Case

...Brief Case Review The case number 248 NY 339, Helen Palsgraf, the Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Long Island Railroad Company, the Defendant-Appellant, was argued from February 24, 1928 and decided on May 29, 1928. In this case, the defendant moved to court and filed an appeal to reverse the decision of Supreme Court in the second Judicial Department of New York by asserting that the plaintiff, Palsgraf, failed to prove that her injury was foreseeable (Cardozo 1). In the previous history of the case, the plaintiff, Palsgraf, lodged a complaint against Long Island Railway Company, the defendant, asserting that the defendant was liable for her injuries that...
2 Pages(500 words)Assignment

Brief a Case

... Brief a Case When Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape allegations, he was interrogated by the police in the ofArizona without having been made aware of his rights as Fifth Amendment of the U.S constitution requires. Although Miranda gave a confession voluntarily and signed that he had not been threatened into making the confession, he had not been notified that he had a right to have a lawyer present at the time of the interrogation as well as to remain silent (Clarkson et al. 209). This is why the dispute was between Miranda and the State of Arizona. Background information on Miranda indicates that he had a history of mental instability, which may have contributed to the crimes that he committed. He was a Phoenix resident... . ...
2 Pages(500 words)Assignment

Brief a case

...Brief a case Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories Sindell’s mother took a drug manufactured and marketed by approximately 200 companies that led to Sindell developing cancer during her adulthood. Since she could not identify the company that manufactured the drug that she ingested before she was born, she decided to sue the five main companies that were involved with the manufacturing and the marketing of the drug. According to her claim, these companies were negligent in the manufacturing and marketing of the drug since adequate tests had not been done prior to its distribution. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims simply because she could not identify the company that distributed the drug. She appealed...
2 Pages(500 words)Assignment

Brief a case

...the executor of Willian E. Story (the uncle) estate, Franklin Sidway (D). During the judgment, the case was ruled in favor of P but later on appeal reversed in favor of D. P appealed (1967). Issue Is mere abstention in regards to legal behavior sufficient consideration to come up with a contract that is valid and enforceable? Rule Yes. Mere abstention from a legal conduct that is permissible is sufficient consideration to seal a promise that is based on forbearance of a valid contract. Consideration is not taken as a benefit to the person who promises. When a someone’s offer is ambiguous regarding whether accepting it shall be in form of exchange of promises or performance, determining if the person who offered was...
1 Pages(250 words)Assignment

Brief a case

...Case: Rosenzweig vs. givens Facts: Background between the parties Rosenzweig and Givens had been in a romantic relationship for some time. However, the relationship ended, and there arose a dispute over the purchase of a condominium apartment. Why is there a dispute? Rosenzweig started an action to close on two mortgages that he claimed to have issued to Givens in 2002. He said that he had loaned her $285000 to purchase the property. At the time the mortgage was issued to Givens, the two were in a romantic relationship (Larkson, Miller, and Cross 294). Rosenzweig paid the down payment of the property that he now claims it was a mortgage. He also claimed to have incurred many household expenses with regard to the...
1 Pages(250 words)Assignment

Brief a case

...Brief a case: Hadley vs Baxendale The case number 9 Exch. 341, 156 Eng. Rep. 145, Hadley, the plaintiff, v. Baxendale, the defendant, was argued and decided in 1854. In this case, the defendant moved to court and lodged a complaint and claim against the plaintiff for damages for breach of contract. The plaintiff sued for 300 pounds for loss of profits and salaries (Crompton 1). In the facts of the case, the plaintiff had contracted the defendant to take a component of his mill’s steam engine to Joyce & Co after it broke down. The breakdown caused the plaintiff to close down the mill waiting for a new one. The defendant had stipulated that if the...
1 Pages(250 words)Coursework
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Let us find you another Essay on topic Brief a case for FREE!

Contact Us