Appellate brief Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Appellate brief - bear witness ExampleUnfortunately, the trial court on February 14, 2009, denied accepting the suggestion. The trial court established that Under the circumstances, for both intents and purposes the suitcase was aband mavend. The defendant did not express a possessory interest in the suitcase at anytime afterward he learned its location. Having been abandoned, the defendant had no expectation of privacy in it or in its limit (Tr. At 40-41) (Congress 551). On March 6, 2009, Mr. Stewart shackled himself in a conditional guilty plea, determined to come upon his right to appeal by suppressing the judgment that was done against him (Doc. At 22) (Congress 551). The defendant was sentenced to 60 months imprisonment, followed up by 3 year period supervised release, on April 27, 2009. This is an appeal of the federal grand jurys judgment that was entered on April 29, 2009. Summary of Arguments This is not the first time a case of this form was appearing before the Cour t. The court case involving United States and Arango, 912 F.2d 441 (10th Cir. 1990), ruled that anybody who has the legal right to the possession of a personalised property has the legal rights to prevent other people from searching it. Other ruling in a similar case between the United States and Jones, 707 F.2d 1169, (10th Cir. 1983), ruled that in situations such as this of United States Vs Steward, no prior or related appeals are made (Congress 552). This case, therefore presents a brain of first stage Whether Mr. Stewart should be allowed to engage in an appeal system, or whether the Law Court should consider this case same(p) one which does not require prior or related appeals. Discussion The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 forget me drug that a 5- and 10-year mandatory-minimum penalty will be issued to any subject found possessing drugs with the purpose of distri exclusivelying depending on the genius and weights of the substances (Congress 539). Stewart was imprisoned for p ossessing 100 grams of heroine with objective of distributing. The court had earlier handled such two cases and gave rulings which are can servicing in understanding the case between United States Vs Stewart. The defendant is in a legitimate office staff as an American citizen, to defend his rights to appeal, so as to keep away other people from inspecting his property. scarcely this condition is not easy to determine, because the process the defendant went through was such a complicated one that required more time and consideration. The trial Court was legally right to deny Mr. Stewart an opportunity to engage in an appeal that was intended to dismiss the charges against him. According to the former judgment, any person who has legal ownership of a property through existing proofs such as documents are the ones who are entitled to take for apple if their assets are illegally inspected without their consents (Congress 539). It should also be noted that the property that can be defend should not be illegal, property like bags carrying heroine, cocaine, bang, guns and other illegal property can be inspected by security officers even if the owner denies accepting inspection. Mr. Stewart, defendant, only claimed that the suitcase was his without providing any evidence. This left a question for proving whether the luggage was legitimately his. Because he was the only person who claimed the ownership of the property, the security had no otherwise but charges him accountable as the owner of the bag. The Airport security