7-2 Final Position Paper Complete and Submit

docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

215-X6565

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by evelynpabon24

Report
1 7-2 Final Position Paper: Complete and Submit Evelyn Pabon JUS 215: Victim and the Justice System Professor Morgans 10 December 2023
2 The case of Julia Burgers, Petitioner, v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County pertains to the termination of the mother's parental rights. Normally, biological mothers retain parental rights over their children. Drug use has the potential to alter a person's thought process and can impair a parent's ability to make moral decisions for their family. This issue is further compounded when the person also has a mental illness. As a result, a child may not be able to grow and develop in a safe environment where they feel loved and supported. It is important to consider victim testimony during sentencing, even if the victim is deceased or unable to attend. Some may believe that a judge may punish a defendant more harshly if they sympathize with the victim, but this should not deter the importance of victim testimony. The victim's experiences and evidence are crucial factors in court proceedings that must be comprehensively understood to make a fair judgment. Without a full understanding of the impact on the victim, the consequences of the sentence may not be sufficient. Therefore, it is essential to value and consider victim testimony during the sentencing process. One of the most significant factors to consider when deciding whether to terminate a parent's parental rights is whether they are capable of providing for their child's needs (Torstar Syndication Services, a division of Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd., 2018). Drug use can alter a person's brain, which can result in the child receiving inadequate care or no care at all. During the sentencing phase of a trial, a defendant may argue that the victim's testimony is biased and lacks probative value. However, victim testimony is often necessary to communicate the events of the occurrence. It's important to note that even if the victim's testimony appears biased, additional evidence is still required to convict the defendant and to ensure that justice is served. It's concerning when impassioned pleas are made during the sentencing phase after a victim impact speech, but this doesn't change the fact that victim testimony is an important component
3 in the judicial process. For example, on September 17, 2004, police officers Kaplan and Little of Raleigh, North Carolina, pulled over Poole's cousin's car. Upon learning about an outstanding warrant for Poole's arrest, the officers endeavored to apprehend him. Despite Poole's attempts to seize Officer Little's firearm, she successfully retained control of the weapon. Unfortunately, Officer Kaplan's gun was extracted from its holster by Poole, resulting in a severe and bleeding cut to Officer Kaplan's head. Reacting swiftly, Officer Little drew her revolver and instructed Poole to disarm. When Poole refused to comply, Officer Little discharged two shots in his direction, regrettably missing the target. Although Poole resisted arrest, law enforcement ultimately succeeded in capturing him. In the case of United States of America v. Conrad Dominic Poole (2007), a police officer who was a victim of an unrelated crime was allowed to testify during the punishment phase. The court determined that the officer did not have victim rights since the remarks made did not result in any unfair punishment or bias. As the new evidence presented clear facts and legal arguments that did not materially aid in the decision-making process, no apparent error was established in this case. On August 21, 2001, at a friend's house in Kansas City, Kansas, Mr. Meeks got into an altercation with James Green, who had previously shut his hand in a door. Mr. Meeks asked Mr. Green for an apology, but Mr. Green refused to take responsibility, which led to Mr. Meeks challenging him to a fight outside. Despite Mr. Green's reluctance, he eventually agreed, and the two engaged in a battle for roughly five minutes. However, when Mr. Green tried to end the fight, Mr. Meeks persisted and produced a gun, firing five or six shots at Mr. Green and striking him once in the chest. Following the incident, Mr. Green collapsed onto the sidewalk, and Mr. Meeks departed the scene. Approximately ten minutes later, Officer Terrance Hall was the initial
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
4 responder on-site. Inquiring about the shooter, Mr. Green identified, "Meeks shot me." He ceased responding at 9:22 and was declared deceased at 10:47. In the legal case of Reginald Meeks v. David R. McKune, Warden, Lansing Correctional Facility; Stephen N. Six, Kansas Attorney General (2009), the victim had already succumbed. Seeking to challenge the victim's statement made prior to his demise, the accused capitalized on this opportunity. Nevertheless, the victim's statement remained admissible in court since the defendant waived the right to confront the witness by causing his death. This permits the inclusion of the crucial statement from the deceased victim as evidence in the legal proceedings. Victims hold fundamental rights, such as the entitlement to a fair trial and the right to present their perspectives during sentencing. Mr. Meeks contended that his pre-death statement should not be considered as evidence, arguing that he was unable to testify before his passing. The Kansas Supreme Court maintained that despite Mr. Green's death during the trial, his statements from before his demise were deemed accurate and admissible. This decision was based on the testimony of at least four other witnesses who could vouch for the authenticity of his prior statements. It was not explicitly mentioned that Mr. Green's inability to testify resulted from Mr. Meeks's act of murder. Victim evidence is a crucial aspect of the legal process. Although there has been concern that judges could impose harsher punishment after hearing a victim statement, victim statements are still vital, especially when the victim is unable to make their statement before sentencing. These statements are significant for the victims as well as for instances in which they play a significant role. The victim legislation protects the rights of victims, including the right to testify during sentencing hearings and other legal proceedings. These rights are safeguarded because it is essential for victims to provide testimony during all sessions.
5 Resources United States of America vs. Conrad Dominic Poole (2007) https://web.archive.org/web/20170208172734/http:/www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Unpublishe d/055049.U.pdf Holmes, J. A. (2009). Opinion: Reginald Meeks vs. David R. McKune, Warden, LansingCorrectional Facility; Stephen N. Six, Kansas Attorney General. https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/09/09-3133.pdf