Category: Criminal Law

In this exercise you have been assigned as the lead detective. You must review the following scenario as well as look up the listed criminal statutes at Florida online statutes.
Statutes to be reviewed: F.S.S. 812.014 Grand Theft
Copy and Paste the link for the Statute: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=grand+theft&URL=0800-0899/0812/Sections/0812.014.html
Responding Officer Narrative:
On Monday 01/29/24, I responded to the area of East 6th Street and Magnolia Avenue, where he made contact with David Cuddy in reference to a report that his gold 2013 Chrysler Town & Country van, bearing Florida tag: EBW123, was stolen by an individual he only knew as “Ace.” Cuddy stated that he had met “Ace” within the last few weeks and that he allowed “Ace” to use the vehicle the previous day, for “Ace” to go to Walmart and spend time with his girlfriend. The only stipulation was that “Ace” return the vehicle in a reasonable time frame. Cuddy allowed “Ace” to have the vehicle on Sunday, 01/28/24, and filed the report after “Ace” hadn’t returned the vehicle on January 28, 2024. During the initial investigation, Cuddy signed an Affidavit of Prosecution for charges against “Ace” and stated he wished to pursue charges. Ofc. J. Thurman
Follow up report #1
I contacted Cuddy on Jan 31, 2024, to follow up with him in reference to his report. Cuddy came to the police department and provided me with several text messages shared between him and “Ace,” during which “Ace” confirmed he was in possession of the vehicle and continually made statements that he would return the vehicle soon and provided false locations where Cuddy’s vehicle was located in the local area.
Follow up report #2
On Feb. 04, 2024, DeFuniak Springs Police Department contacted our agency to advise that their agency recovered the vehicle stolen in this case. Cpl. L. Span took the report and ensured the vehicle was removed from FCIC/NCIC. The vehicle was impounded by DSPD to be recovered by Cuddy. Upon returning to work Monday, February 06, 2024, I contacted DSPD and spoke with Det. White provided me with information that Leslie Cohen was located in the passenger seat of the vehicle, which was parked at a motel in their city. The DSPD report stated that Cohen was not legally in possession of the vehicle as she did not have the keys, and they were not in the vehicle. Cohen was arrested on an oustanding warrant out of Bay County and was being extradited back this afternoon. I will make contact with her at the Bay County Jail to conduct an interview regarding this incident.
****ALSO SEE FILE IN MODULE FOR PHOTOS: they are attached*
There are 3 Parts to this assignment this is the first. The second part will be the Mock Interview Oral Competency portion that will take place in Module 9. The third part will be a critique and feedback discussion board in Module 10.
I. Rubric For Written Plan (5 points) You are to prepare a line of 10 to 15 questions to conduct an interview with the witness Ms. Leslie Cohen. You will want to obtain as much information in your line of questioning to help in identifying the perpetrator as well as meet the elements of the offenses you believe were committed. Written Plan: (5 points) should consist of an Outline Addressing the following Questions and uploaded in the submission area in Module
What initial steps will you take to build rapport with the witness? (.5) pts
What are the legal consideration in this situation? Ethical considerations? 1 pts
What oral communication strategies do you plan to use during the interview? 1 pts
How will you present yourself professionally during the interview? (.5) pts
What are the five most important items you need to determine during the interview and what 10-15 questions do you plan to ask to elicit the information? 2 pts

The book needed to complete this essay is Cases and Materials on Criminal Law by Joshua Dressler and Garvey, 9th ed. West Pub. 2022. ISBN: 978-1647087708
Fully answer all of the following questions. Give reasoned answers in essay form (not bullet points or lists). The expectation is that the exam in total should be between 8-12 pages (based on past similar exams) but that is just a guesstimate. Answers will be graded on analysis of the issues and concepts needed to deal with the hypotheticals. Do your own work — the assignment will be uploaded via SafeAssign, so if you quote something, an in-text citation is OK. 1. a. Read the Greenwalt article from the Dressler text pp. 34-35 and answer questions 1 and 2 on p. 36
b. Read and fully answer Question 4 from p. 42 of the Dressler text.
c . Read Coker v. Georgia from pp. 76-81 and fully answer Questions 1 and 2 from pp. 81-82.
2. a. Discuss causation and its various concepts as discussed in class and the text.
b. In addition, answer the following hypotheticals:
Who is at fault for Y, D, and F’s deaths, and why in the following hypotheticals? Give a reasoned answer using the concepts of causation covered in class and the text.
Hypothetical Facts: X and Y steal property from Z’s riverfront home. The thieves fled in a boat. Z fires two shots at the boat, seeking (unlawfully) to kill or scare them. i. X, fearful of another shot, dives into the water causing the boat to capsize. Y drowns.
ii. The boat – now unmanned – drifts a ½ mile downstream and over a waterfall striking D and killing her as well. Discuss the causation issues and who might be criminally culpable in this scenario. iii. B nearly drowns and is rescued by a passerby (E), who puts him in his car to get him to the hospital. E is intoxicated and crashes the vehicle killing Y and bicyclist F.
3. Do the Problems from Question 2 (A-F) on p. 236 in the Dressler text. Explain the reasoning in your answers and explore the possibilities available.
4. Fully analyze the following problems.
a. Smith, a pedestrian, was struck by a car while walking in a crosswalk and was seriously injured. Jones was driving the car that hit Smith. An ambulance was called to the scene, and Smith was rushed immediately to the hospital. Unfortunately, all of this occurred amid a heavy snowstorm, and on the way to the hospital, the ambulance hit a patch of ice and careened off the road killing the ambulance driver, the EMT, and Smith. Jones has been charged with homicide in the deaths of all three crash victims. Is she guilty of these alleged crimes? Fully explain why or why not.
b. Burr, in a jealous rage, shot his victim, Hamilton, twice in the head after he saw Hamilton flirting with his girlfriend. When Hamilton reached the hospital, his heart was still beating, but he had suffered irreversible brain damage and loss of brain function (as evidenced by EEG and other medical evidence). Hamilton’s family agreed to have his artificial ventilation turned off (it was keeping his heart beating) so his organs could be harvested for transplantation.
Burr is charged with first-degree murder in Hamilton’s death. His defense attorney argues that the doctors who disconnected Hamilton’s ventilator were the cause of his death — not Burr. Is the defense counsel correct — why or why not? What if Hamilton’s family refused treatment due to his religious convictions, and he subsequently died?
5. Consider the different standards of Mens Rea dealt with in the text and class. Answer Questions 1, 2, and 3 (and subparts) from p. 176-77 in the Dressler casebook. Explain the reasoning behind your answers. The Model Penal Code statute (MPC) is in the textbook.

Respond to each questions include various sources, make sure to not use Al;
Many police department use sting operations to enforce the criminal law regarding crimes such
as drugs and prostitution.
1. Evaluate when and how a sting operation may have crossed the line and become entrapment. That is to say explain in detsail and with hypothetical examples at what point a sting operation changes to entrapment.
2. Do you believe that such types of law enforcement should be abolished? Why or why not?
3. What do they think would happen if sting operations were abolished?
4. What about programs like “To Catch a Predator?

Intro to Legal Research and Writing
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
The Alaska Administrative Code (A.A.C.)
The Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.)
To be filed on or before Monday, December 4
LAW DERIVED FROM
ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
Three Equal Branches of American Government
As we learned early in the course, the Constitution of the United States provides us with
a “tripartite” system of government, one that exists “in three parts” or branches. Through a
series of checks and balances, each of the three branches of government is designed to carry
out a specific governing function while retaining power equal to the other two branches. This
system of government provides us with a legislative branch of government which enacts our
laws, an executive branch which enforces our laws, and a judicial branch which interprets our
laws. As each of our fifty states came into being, a similar tripartite structure was adopted for
most state governments. The same is true of most local governments. As a result, we have in
the United States three branches of government, executive, legislative and judicial, which exist
at three levels of government, federal, state and local. We obtain “law” from each of these three
equal branches.
The legislative branch of government consists of elected representatives who “enact”
law; the federal congress, the state legislatures, and the municipal assemblies or councils. We
refer to these laws as statutes or ordinances.
The judicial branch consists of the federal court system, a separate court system for
each state and the District of Columbia, and in most instances, although not in Alaska, a local
or municipal court system. This branch of government “decrees” law which we refer to as “case
law” or “common law.”
Finally, the executive branch of government consists of elected executive officers, the
President at the federal level, the Governor at the state level, and the Mayor at the municipal
level. In addition, the executive branch includes several administrative agencies, each headed
by an administrator appointed by the executive. We obtain much of our law from the
administrative agencies of the executive branch of our government. In fact, most authorities
declare that the majority of our law comes from the executive branch through the administrative
rules and regulations that are promulgated by the various administrative agencies. We generally
simply refer to this law as “regulations.” We all hear constantly from politicians that it is the
unreasonable use of regulations that adversely impacts many aspects of our day-to-day lives
and impedes the progress of our economy.
You can easily name dozens of these agencies. They are known by a variety of names:
“agency,” “commission,” “administration,” “service,” “authority,” “board,” “department, “division,”
or even “corporation.” For example, common federal agencies and their acronyms include:
Agricultural Stabilization Commission (ASC)
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF)
1

I. Relationship
a. In what capacity do you know (name)
b. how long have you known him?
c. Feelings for (name)
II. General statement of support
a. Do you understand the trouble (name) is in?
b have you talked with him about his trouble?
c. are you able to help him in any way? (place to live, job, other support)
III. Statement and Character
a. what good things can you say about (name)
b. mention character traits (honesty, courage, love, etc and examples)
c. offer any personal experiences or insights that may help the Judge understand (name) true character
IV. Conclusion
a. express to Judge in your own words how (name) knows he has done wrong, regrets doing what he did, and wants to go forward with his life.

In 200 to 400 words discuss how fusion centers have changed in the United States from post 9/11 to today and how fusion centers play a role in counterterrorism strategies.
As a part of this assignment, you are required to read the web page Appendix 1 – Establishing a National Integrated Network of State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers, which was originally published by the Bush administration in 2007 (updated in 2012) and outlines the initial role of fusion centers in the United States. This will provide the historical context and background information for your essay. Review the updated National Strategy for Information Sharing and Safeguarding document.

This assignment requires you to write a case study of the following decision: R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224 You should have particular reference to more recent case law including specifically R v Malkinson [2023] EWCA Crim 954
Criteria for Assessment
1. This case summary should include:
• Introduction. Introduce the case and its legal significance. • Facts. The facts should be kept as brief as possible. State the facts simply, clearly and in the order events occurred. • Decision. This should, again, be as brief as possible but should include the main findings of the court or tribunal, together with any relevant extracts from the findings which explain how and why the court or tribunal came to that decision.
• Analysis. This is the most important part. You must critically analyse the decision of this case in the context of the law relating to the admissibility of identification evidence. It gives you an opportunity to critically assess the significance of the decision in the relevant legal area (including its impact on previous, or subsequent case law, and to comment on and criticise the decision in the light of various opinions and theories, which relate to that area of law and the impact it has today. 2. Please note: • Summarise the case in your own words. You can use quotations if they are important but keep these to a minimum. We are looking to see how well you understand the case, its context and significance.
• Please make sure this is referenced properly • Make sure you proofread your work. We will be assessing grammar and punctuation as well as your ability to correctly summarise this reported case. Word Count
The word count is 2000.
There will be a penalty of a deduction of 10% of the mark (after internal moderation) for work exceeding the word limit by 10% or more.
The word limit includes quotations and citations, but excludes the references list.
Marking and Feedback
What will I be marked against?
Details of the marking criteria for this task can be found at the bottom of this assignment brief. Assessed Module Learning Outcomes
The Learning Outcomes for this module align to the marking criteria which can be found at the end of this brief. Ensure you understand the marking criteria to ensure successful achievement of the assessment task. The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task:
Learning Outcomes This assignment is designed to assess the following learning outcomes:
• Critically review the historical development of and principles underlying the law of evidence.
• Identify, apply and evaluate the rules of evidence and relevant case law.
• Undertake extensive legal research and consolidate this research in order to respond appropriately to assessment tasks.
• Critically evaluate proposals for reform where appropriate.
This is the assignment brief. Use a few articles and cases but dont over do the references.
Make Sure to add a bibliography.
This is a key assignment and it’s very important I receive top marks.
Please aim to achieve a first. Aim for around 75-80%

We will now continue our discussion about the Grand Jury.
Last week we briefly discussed the grand jury’s investigative power. As mentioned, the grand jury
indicts upon a finding of probable cause. Accordingly, the grand jury’s power to investigate is
quite encompassing. As discussed by the US Supreme Court in US v R Enterprises (link appears
below), for the grand jury to determine probable cause, its investigative power is not limited by
probable cause to investigate; the threshold to investigate is way much lower. This is because the
grand jury cannot know in advance what information will be obtained in its investigation. Read
the case below:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/498/292/case.html
Last week, we also discussed that a target of an investigation is not constitutionally nor by any
Rule entitled to counsel inside the grand jury. (US v Mandujano; Rule 6) This does not mean that
a grand jury witness or target cannot have his attorney. If he/she does, counsel must wait outside
the grand jury room, and the witness/target is free to walk out and consult whenever necessary.
Because every citizen is required to appear before a grand jury, and normally one will not be under
police custody when so summoned, Miranda Warnings need not be constitutionally given. Hence,
anyone who incriminates or perjures himself before the Grand Jury cannot later invoke a lack of
Miranda Warnings (US v Mandujano page 2 of syllabus).
In addition, because the Grand Jury proceeding constitutes an investigative stage, prior to the
issuance of an indictment many other constitutional rights do not apply. For example, the
government is not required to provide the grand jury any exculpatory evidence (as is required of
the government to provide to the defense once formal criminal charges attach — something we
shall discuss during our class on Discovery) — (US v Williams page 2 of syllabus); likewise the
government can unlike in a criminal trial present evidence that may be suppressed if obtained in
violation of the IVth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures (US v
Calandra page 2 of syllabus). You are not required to read the Williams and Calandra cases,
however, its is recommended.
Witnesses who appear before the Grand Jury must normally answer all questions posed, except
any which may be self-incriminating and are thus protected by the Vth Amendment. Also, certain
questions need not be answered on the grounds of certain few and specific privileges, for example
attorney-client.
A Grand Jury witness cannot generically claim Fifth Amendment privilege. For example, he/she
cannot refuse to provide name, address and other non-incriminating information. Also, a witness
cannot decline to provide physical evidence, such as hair and blood samples, or remove her shirt
to show a scar or tattoo, or even provide a voice or handwriting sample. (US v. Dionisio and US
v Mara page 2 of syllabus — you are not required to read these cases as well; I am including them
for your information).
Witnesses who invoke the Vth Amendment may still be required to answer questions if the
Government immunizes them. That is, under the federal immunity statute, 18 USC sec 6002, once
immunity is given, the witness cannot be charged criminally regarding any testimony given, nor
from evidence derived from the testimony. Immunity, when used properly is a useful tool for the
Government to obtain evidence. If the witness refuses to answer, he/she can be found in criminal
contempt. The following short article and video further explain the concept of immunity. Please
read and view the same:
https://www.whitecollarcrimeresources.com/how-immunity-works-in-federal-criminal-cases.html
. After reading US v R Enterprises, what limits, if any, exist to a federal grand
jury’s investigative power. Please discuss and provide an original example not from
the case.
2. Agree or disagree with the following statement: While the government can
benefit from immunizing a witness, so too can a witness or target benefit from
immunity. Explain your answer.
3. Optional — Have any of you ever participated in a grand jury proceeding to
testify about an investigation? If so, what has been your general experience?
(Because the proceeding is confidential, you need not provide details; also if ongoing
do not answer)

Please see attached journal entry instructions. I also attached the questions for comfort in social worksheet so you can have an idea of direction however you do not have to complete.

Rights at Trial
As you’ve learned throughout this course, defendants receive numerous rights during a criminal trial. Discuss, in detail, two of those rights and explain why they are crucial to ensuring a fair trial.