PLEASE ANSWER EACH DISCUSSION QUESTION.
MODULE 7 DISCUSSION 1
For the purpose of this hypothetical question, assume that the actions occur in the fictional county of Roar in the fictional state of Lionsville.
___________________________
You represent 30-year-old, Todd Holms, who has been convicted at trial of first-degree homicide. Todd suffers from severe and chronic depression and posttraumatic stress disorder. He has suffered with these mental illnesses for the past eight years and, as recently as last year, been admitted into a psychiatric institution as a result of these illnesses. The prosecution will be asking the jury to impose the death penalty since the victim in the case was only 10 years old. Argue to the judge why it is appropriate for the jury to hear the mitigating factors in this case which would lessen a potential death sentence for your client. In your argument refer to the law according to the cases of Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 585 (2002) and the case of Smith v. Texas, 125 S. Ct. 400 (2004).
– CASES ARE ATTACHED
MODULE 8 DISCUSSION 1
For the purpose of this hypothetical question, assume that the actions occur in the fictional county of Roar in the fictional state of Lionsville.
___________________________
You are the prosecutor in a rape case against defendant, Larry Stall. During your investigation in the case you become aware that DNA was discovered on the victim that does not match the DNA of the defendant, Stall. You choose not to disclose the DNA evidence to the defense. Larry Stall is thereafter convicted of the rape charge and is sentenced to 20 years in prison. What should be the result here and why?
MODULE 8 DISCUSSION 2
For the purpose of this hypothetical question, assume that the actions occur in the fictional county of Roar in the fictional state of Lionsville.
___________________________
Assume the same set of facts as Discussion One but now know that the laboratory, which is hired by the prosecution to perform the DNA analysis of the defendant, makes an error. The error results in a DNA match to Larry Stall where there really is none. As the defense counsel could you still argue for prosecutorial misconduct? Why or why not?
For This or a Similar Paper Click Here To Order Now
