Answered You can buy a ready-made answer or pick a professional tutor to order an original one.
criminal justice course based on courtroom and legal proceedings
WHAT WE NEED HERE IS PROPER APA CITATION AND NO PLAGIARISM OR GRAMMER ERRORS
*This is a CRIMINAL JUSTICE course based on Courtroom and Legal proceedings.**-Research the Internet and locate at least one real-life example of each of the following:-Prosecutorial misconduct-Ineffective assistance by criminal defense counsel-Judicial misconductWrite an 900 word paper in which you summarize each example and address the following questions:-What did the prosecutor do wrong? How does immunity protect the prosecutor from the consequences of his or her misconduct? -What did the criminal defense attorney do wrong? What is the Strickland v. Washington standard? How do the performance prong and the prejudice prong of the Strickland standard apply to the example? -What did the judge do wrong? Which judicial selection options either appointment, election, or merit would help to reduce instances of judicial misconduct? -How does the misconduct or ineffectiveness of these courtroom participants reflect or thwart the crime control model of criminal justice? How does the misconduct or ineffectiveness of these courtroom participants reflect or thwart the due process model of criminal justice?** APA FORMAT ONLY, PROPERLY CITED SOURCES IS A MUST, AND NO PLAGIARISM! **
- @
- 13 orders completed
- ANSWER
-
Tutor has posted answer for $40.00. See answer's preview
**************** Name: Institution ************ ****** ************************************ ***** ** ********* ******* Court dismissed **** ****** *** rape ******* filed ******* Armstrong ***** who *** ****** maintained *** ********* ********** *** ***** *** ********* *** ********** prosecutorial ***** *** ** County **** who provided the ********* evidence ***** would **** *** ******** free ******** *** ************* ************ ***** ***** was ********* in the ******** concerning *** ****** *** **** ***** ******* (his ****** ******* ** Wisconsin-Madison University)The ******* ***** ********** Ralph’s ********** ** *** **** **** ***** carrying out the *** **** ** ***** and **** ******* ***** ** an offender *********** decided to ***** ***** *** ** was **** for four years ****** bars ******** *** time *** ************** to *********** ****** ****** the ******* ** *** ***** a ***** lady came ******* and *** ********* that ** *** **** **** *** ******** ******* Ralph’s younger ******* ** Norsetter **** ** ********* ** *** District ******** told her **** he’s *** *** *** committed the ****** ******* having *** ********** fortitude ******* to turn ******* -In ** authorities and free his ******** brother”) **** ******* *** ********** ******* ******* ********* *** ******** his ******* ** *** ********** **** *** crime ******** *** *** *********** ** police as * possible suspect *********** after *** ********* ****** ************* **** *** ** ****** when ********* ******* ** *** ********** ** 1995 he ***** **** ******* ********* ***** the phone call *** never pursued *** **** Stephen Armstrong has ***** kick *** ***************** **** was upset ** *** ******* ***** ** *** year **** ***** *** ***** were ******* on ***** *** **** ******* ***** ** * culprit *** Prosecuting individuals ***** ** ******* *** Ralph’s retrial Despite the **** **** ******* conviction *** on ******* ** * **** **** ********* ********* ** ********* ** *** **** **** **** *** *** enlighten ********** ******* concerning *** ********* ************* and *** *** ****** ***** the **** ******* ********** ******** ** that time *** kicked *** bucket *** prosecutors **** ********* by *** Supreme ***** to provide advice ** the guard ******** ***** *** the situation *** ** ** maintained ** going ***** down John disregarded **** *** ********* that *** ******* ***** ****** ******* ** *** ******** out **** *** tests in ***** to get *** *********** ***** ************ 2014) Norsetter ********** that court ********** ** ********** evidence *** *** ************ ** conducting more *** ********** *** tests that were ********* *********** ***** natural *********** ** **** ** ******** *** ******* **** ***** ********** *** ******* DNA testing Also **** of *** ***** asked by **** ***** *** **** ********** concerning ****** *** products ******* **** relatives ***** ****** it ********* ** *** ********** ******* ** *********** ******** ******* *** ********* *** ******** ************ ************** ** ******* ***** ******* (2014) ** ****** ** **** a ******** by rejecting *** ******** ********** ************* ******* ******** ***** ****** **** **** *** ************* ****** *********** from *** *********** ********** ********* ******* **** **** ** ************* ********** ********* **** ** ************ * ********** **** ** prosecutorial ********** ******* that says **** after *********** ***** **** **** *** *********** ** ******** ****** *** ********* ** crime ******** **** were already ****** ** that individual ** *** **** they ***** went ******* deceiving *** ***** and *** **** hiding the evidence; ***** ******** there ** ***** **** good ****** ** *** ***** ** ***** ***** *** ***** ** justice may ***** ** *********** at ******* ******** protect *** *********** **** *** ******* ** their ********** ********** ********* can *** *** has *** and ** putting ******** ******* ****** barsBut they **** not worry ***** punishment In * ***** ******* ******* *** ******** of *********** is ********* **** ****** corpus ***** *** individuals ** *** ********** ** ******** *********** **** **** ********* *********** gods ** the ***** ************ *********** entity ***** *** they *** ****** ** ****** injustices **** ******** * ** the **** *** ****** ****** ******* ***** ***** that *** prosecuting ******* can never ** ********* ** **** ***** lawsuits *** ******* ** prosecutorial ********** even ** *** matter is **** ****** ***** ** ** ****** ******* **** ***** a prosecutor card ******* ** **** evidence ********** ****** temper **** ******** *** *** ** **** *********** for ***** ******* ****** *** ***** can ********* **** ******** ****** ******** pertaining to the ********** committed ** the prosecutors ** ******* *** *** ******* ************* ****** **** though **** ***** having ** ******* *** findings ****** **** *** *********** *********** *** ******** ** ****** how ********* they **** ******** errors ******* standard ********** ** *** *** *********************** The defendants *** ******** ** ******* *** ****** ***** concerning ************* abuse *** also **** the substantial ******** **** the *********** ********** the ***** ****** concerning their ***************** ** the Law ****** *********** ********** *** ******** ********* numerous ********** over *** people ** ********* *** ***** misconduct to be ******* ** ******** ************* of ******** ********* to oversight *** *********** ******* ******* * **** ** ***** ************* ******** ****** be ************* ******* ** *** ********** ** *** ******** ********** ******** ** ***** so ****** ************* ** *** precise reason **** ***** is * ********* ** ******** ******* system-instead ** ************ ******* ********* ******** ** perpetuating ********** *** ***** *** ****** expect **** ** **** ** taking bribes ** ***** cases *** ***** compromising ***** the *** ****** ******** power ******* *********** no *** ***** **** **** or ****** ***** **** **** a ********* ***** ********** in ******** ** ***** where *** ***** already ***** in ***** favor and *********** *** *** *** the upper **** by advantageous ******** that ******* *** from even the egregious wrong ***** The ****** ** *** ****** ****** ***** ** against **** ************* *** demand their rights ******* ** **** by ***** ******* ****** ***** **** *** ***** ** no ***** **** nor savior ****** **** own ********* mind” *** ***** ************ for the ******** ** *** **** fortunate *** *************** *** ********** *** the care ** *** ******* *** ******* ********* ***** ********* *********** ** the *** ** exactly ******** keeping *** ****** ******* Our ***** ***** ** * ****** ***** ** ***** ***** ** *********** weren’t ** power *** * digress ******* * could go ** *** on ************* **** *** problem is *** ****** enough ****** **** it *** **** ** is then **** together ** ****** *** ******** that **** ** *** ******* *** *** ******* *** ***** to **** ********* ******** ************ *** ********* ******* then ** ate ***** ***** to **** *** ******* ******* system ** **** ****** *** ******* (Schmalleger 2014) REFERENCEBennett * * ***** Feldman M S ****** ************** ******* ** *** ********** Justice and ******** ** ******** ******* **** *** Books Schmalleger * ****** ******** ******* ***** ******** ******************************* Participation professional ******** Name: *********** ************ Tutor: Date: The Judge of ********* Circuit ***** ********* **** murder *** **** ******* ***** ******* ********* ***** *** *** ****** maintained *** ********* throughout the case; *** ********* *** determined ************* ***** out ** ****** **** *** provided *** ********* evidence which ***** have *** ******** free ******** *** Judge(Bennett &Feldman ***** ***** *** ********* ** *** ******** concerning the ****** *** **** Kamps Charlie **** fellow ******* ** ***************** University)The Supreme ***** ********** Ralph’s conviction ** *** **** **** after ******** out the DNA test ** ***** and **** ******* Ralph ** ** ******** Prosecutors ******* to ***** ***** *** ** *** held for **** ***** behind **** awaiting *** time *** ************** to *********** (2014) ****** *** ******* ** *** trial a ***** **** **** ******* and *** ********* **** ** the **** **** she ******** ******* ********* ******* ******* ** ********* John an ********* ** *** ******** Attorney **** *** that he’s *** one *** ********* *** crime; ******* having *** testicular ********* ******* to **** himself *** ** authorities *** **** *** ******** brother”) **** ******* *** ********** ******* Stephen Armstrong *** ******** *** ******* ** the University when *** crime ******** *** *** *********** by ****** as * possible ******* *********** after the ********* though Armstrong’s case was ** ****** when ********* learned ** *** confession in **** he ***** **** defense ********* about *** phone call and never ******* *** **** Stephen ********* *** since **** *** bucket Ralph’s **** *** ***** ** the ******* ***** ** the **** **** ***** DNA ***** **** ******* on semen *** hair ******* ***** ** a ******* *** Prosecuting *********** ***** ** ******* *** Ralph’s retrial ******* the **** **** ******* ********** was ** ******* at a **** **** ********* ********* ** admission ** *** **** 1995 **** *** *** ********* ********** ******* ********** the ********* ************* *** did *** sought after *** **** ******* ********** brother) ** that time *** ****** the ****** *** prosecutors were requested ** the Supreme ***** ** ******* ****** ** *** ***** ******** ***** *** *** ********* *** ** ** ********** ** ***** ***** **** **** *********** that *** ********* **** *** Supreme ***** ****** ******* ** for ******** *** **** *** ***** in order to get *** *********** ***** (Schmalleger **************** manhandled **** court ********** ** ********** ******** for *** ************ ** ********** **** *** ********** DNA ***** **** **** ********* *********** ***** ******* *********** as **** as ******** the ******* **** ***** ********** for ******* *** ******* **** type ** DNA tests asked ** John ***** *** **** perception ********** innate *** products ******* **** ********* hence making ** ********* ** *** resistance ******* ** *********** exchange ******* *** ********* *** ******** ************ ************** to Bennett ***** ******* (2014) on Friday ** **** * ******** by ********* *** argument ********** ************* alleged ******** Judge ****** **** **** *** ************* abuses *********** from *** *********** ********** ********* choices **** **** ** ************* ********** ********* This ** ************ * ********** **** of prosecutorial ********** because **** **** **** ***** *********** ***** **** **** *** *********** ** innocent ****** *** ********* no crime ******** **** **** ******* ****** ** **** individual ** *** **** **** still **** forward ********* *** ***** and the **** ****** the ********* ***** goodness ***** is ***** some **** people ** the ***** ** bring ***** *** ***** ** ******* may still be established ** ******* ******** ******* *** *********** **** the ******* of ***** ********** District ********* *** *** *** has *** *** ** ******* ******** persons ****** barsBut they need not ***** ***** ********** ** * ***** process ******* *** immunity of prosecution ** ********* like ****** ****** ***** *** *********** in *** department ** ******** *********** feel that they’re *********** **** of *** ***** ************ prosecuting ****** knows … **** can ****** ** commit injustices with ******** * ** the year *** ****** ****** ******* ***** ruled **** *** *********** ******* can ***** ** ********* ** **** civil ******** for ******* of ************* ********** **** ** *** ****** is **** ****** ***** is ** really ******* that gives * prosecutor card ******* ** **** ******** ********** jurors ****** **** ******** *** *** ** **** accountable *** ***** actions ****** law ***** *** ********* **** ******** ****** ******** ********** to the misconduct ********* by *** *********** ** ******* *** *** ******* ************* ****** **** though were found ****** no harm” the ******** ****** **** *** prosecuting *********** *** ******** ** ****** how ********* they **** ******** ****** ******* ******** ********** by *** *** *********************** *** defendants *** ******** to ******* *** ****** ***** concerning prosecutorial ***** and **** **** *** substantial ******** **** *** *********** prejudiced *** ***** ****** ********** their ***************** to the *** Review *********** ********** *** ******** ********* ******** ********** **** *** ****** ** ********* *** ***** ********** to ** charged ** ******** ************* ** ******** ********* ** oversight the *********** ******* ******* a **** in ***** ************* ******** ****** be ************* ******* of *** ********** on *** ******** ********** mischief of ***** ** ****** professionals ** *** ******* ****** **** ***** ** * ********* ** ******** ******* system-instead of establishing justice ********* ******** ** ************ corruption *** knows one should expect **** ** **** be ****** ****** in major ***** *** being ************ ***** *** *** ****** absolute ***** ******* absolutely; ** *** would **** more ** ****** ***** that **** * ********* ***** ********** ** ******** ** power ***** *** ***** ******* ***** ** ***** ***** *** *********** *** *** *** *** ***** **** ** advantageous position **** ******* him **** **** the ********* wrong doing *** ****** of *** people ****** stand ** ******* **** ************* *** ****** ***** ****** endowed ** **** ** ***** ******* ****** ***** from God ***** is ** ***** Lord *** ****** ****** **** *** cognitive ******* *** ***** carelessness *** *** humanity ** *** less ********* *** *************** the ********** *** the **** ** *** process *** blatant disregard ***** ********* *********** ** *** *** ** exactly ******** keeping *** ****** divided Our ***** ***** ** * ****** ***** ** ***** ***** of individuals ********* ** power *** * ******* ******* I ***** ** on *** ** ************* what *** ******* ** but unless ****** ****** **** ** for what ** ** **** **** ******** ** unison and proclaim **** this ** our ******* *** and ******* not ***** to **** unethical ******** ************ *** injustice ******* **** ** *** ***** going to **** the ******* ******* ****** ** **** ****** *** deserve (Schmalleger *********************************************** **************** W * ***** ******* M S ****** ************** ******* ** *** courtroom: ******* and ******** in ******** ******* Quid *** ***** *********** * ****** ******** justice today ******** ************
