Monday 04/13/09

Need help with this..

based on someone's experience with these procedures.
Post a 175- to 350-word response restating the events in the proper order.
Answer this question as part of your response:

1.) what sources were the rights afforded this individual derived?

Criminal Procedures Topic

At 12:00 p.m., on August 16, 2005, Robert Smith began his journey to freedom down the halls of the prison he called home for the last 2 years. Despite receiving a 5-year sentence, Robert was paroled for good behavior. His lawyer had tried repeatedly to appeal his sentence as a violation of Robert’s Fourth Amendment rights, but the Arizona Supreme Court denied the appeal based on its merits. Now he was walking unbound toward his release.
This was a truly good day, long in the making. As Robert walked down toward his freedom, he recounted his journey to this place.
Robert remembered the thunder of the gavel after the jury read its decision: Guilty on all counts. Although the opening statements made by his lawyer were compelling, the prosecution crystallized a guilty verdict during closing arguments, before the twelve-member jury of his peers even left to deliberate. The prosecution detailed pictures and phone calls as evidence against him, while Robert’s defense corroborated his whereabouts with his ex-girlfriend, claiming the prosecution did not offer proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Her testimony, however, could not withstand the prosecution’s cross-examination—which poked so many holes in her story, her credibility lacked substance. Robert could only hang his head low when the judge detailed the general principles of evidence and law to the jury.

To restate the events in the proper order, here is a summary:

On August 16, 2005, Robert Smith, who had been imprisoned for the past two years, was granted parole for good behavior, despite initially receiving a five-year sentence. His lawyer had attempted multiple appeals, arguing that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated, but the Arizona Supreme Court rejected the appeal.

As Robert walked towards his release, he reflected on the events that led him to this point. He recalled the moment when the jury declared him guilty on all counts. Despite his lawyer delivering persuasive opening statements, the prosecution solidified their case with compelling evidence during the closing arguments. They presented photographs and phone call records as proof against Robert, while his defense tried to strengthen his alibi by bringing in his ex-girlfriend as a witness. Although she affirmed his whereabouts, her testimony crumbled under the prosecution's cross-examination, diminishing her credibility.

Ultimately, the judge provided instructions on the general principles of evidence and law to the jury, leading to their decision of guilty. Despite the efforts of Robert's lawyer to argue that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated, the appeal was denied.

Answering the question about the sources from which Robert's rights were derived, it can be inferred that the rights in question refer to his Fourth Amendment rights, which protect against unreasonable searches and seizures. In this case, his lawyer argued that the evidence used against him was obtained without proper adherence to these rights. However, the Arizona Supreme Court denied the appeal, suggesting that they believed the evidence had been acquired lawfully.