week 4 discussion 2

 Evaluate a Modern U.S. Supreme Court Criminal Case, 2005 or Later       
Analyze a criminal case opinion issued by the U.S. Supreme Court, 2005 or later; explain the issue(s) in the case, the holding of the case, its basis, the number of justices for and against the opinion, and whether it set precedent (i.e., new law) or merely reaffirmed long-standing constitutional values. Identify the justice who authored the opinion, and provide that justice’s ideology. You may choose any case listed below, or locate a criminal U.S. Supreme Court case, 2005 or later, to analyze. It is recommended that your post contain approximately 400 words.

Clark v. Arizona (Links to an external site.) (2006) [Insanity Defense]
Davis v. United States (Links to an external site.) (2011) [Illegal Search Admissible]
Davis v. Washington (Links to an external site.) (2006) [911 Call Admissible at trial?]
Florida v. Powell (Links to an external site.) (2009) [Miranda Warnings]
Giles v. California (Links to an external site.) (2008) [Dead victim’s statements not admissible at trial?]
Graham v. Florida (Links to an external site.) (2010) [Life Sentence for Juvenile Violate Eighth Amendment?]
Greenlaw v. United States (Links to an external site.) (2008) [Can court enhance sentence without prosecutor request?]
Herring v. United States (Links to an external site.) (2009) [Erroneous Search Warrant Require Suppression of Evidence?]
Holmes v. South Carolina (Links to an external site.) (2006) [Exclude Defense Evidence?]
Hudson v. Michigan (Links to an external site.) (2006) [Fourth Amendment “Knock and Announce” Rule]
J.D.B. v. North Carolina (Links to an external site.) (2011) [Age Matter for Miranda Warnings?]
Kennedy v. Louisana (Links to an external site.) (2007) [Death penalty for child rape?]
Maryland v. King (Links to an external site.) (2013) [DNA Collected for Data Base for Mere Arrest?]
McDonald v. Chicago (Links to an external site.) (2010) [Gun Rights]
Missouri v. McNeely (Links to an external site.) (2013) [Police Take Blood without a Warrant for DUI?]
Oregon v. Guzek (Links to an external site.) (2006) [Death Sentence Evidence]
Salinas v. Texas (Links to an external site.) (2013) [Fifth Amendment Protect Silence Before Arrest or Miranda?]
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez (Links to an external site.) (2006) [Defendant have right to chosen lawyer?]
United States v. Jones (Links to an external site.) (2012) [Warrantless Tracking Car Violate Fourth Amendment?]
United States v. Williams (Links to an external site.) (2008) [Child Pornography Protected by Free Speech?]
Yeager v. United States (Links to an external site.)(2009) [Double Jeopardy]

Guided Response:
Building on the information garnered in the course from previous readings and assignments, critically evaluate one of the above U.S. Supreme Court cases. Can you see evidence of the court’s political leanings? Why or why not? Does anything in the majority opinion go against what you would consider to be the current court’s political leanings? Provide your own opinion of whether or not the court ruled and reasoned correctly; fully explain your opinion in either regard. Review your colleagues’ posts, and substantively respond to at least two of your peers. Continue to monitor the discussion forum until 5:00 p.m. (Mountain Time) on Day 7 of the week, and respond with robust dialogue to anyone who replies to your initial post.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more