CRM 123 – Case Analysis 3 Fact Patterns1

CRM 123 – Case Analysis 3 Fact Patterns

Following the Guidelines of the American Psychological Association

CRM 123 – Case Analysis 3 Fact Patterns

  1. The main issue is that Kurt was playing his music too loud as well as in possession of illegal drugs and illegal drug paraphernalia. What further complicates this issue is that Kurt, who received a complaint from Ima Complain, is the one who filed the complaint against Kurt and then Kurt insulted Ms. Complain and her son who is Officer Vidal got a warrant for Kurt from a judge that he knew through work. The main issue is complicated when the drugs enter the issue since Officer Vidal had a valid warrant to enter Kurt’s home for the noise violation; however once inside Kurt’s home basically stole a drink from Kurt’s fridge and then discovered the illegal drugs and the illegal drug paraphernalia that resulted in Kurt receiving additional charges for drug possession.

The rules of this case that violate United States law are a subjective noise level control. In Charlotte, North Carolina Sec. 15-69 the laws state the noise levels are permitted between 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and are to be lowered outside of these times (Schubert, 2015). The other charges that Kurt is faced with are drug possession. In the United States, Title 21 is the law for the Controlled Substances Act which basically states that is illegal to possess street drugs for recreational purposes (Schubert, 2015). This also includes drug paraphernalia.

The analysis that comes into play in this issue is that Kurt may not have been arrested at all if his neighbor was not Ima Complain with a son who is a police officer. Kurt was doing something wrong; however Officer Vidal also did something wrong by taking a drink from Kurt’s fridge which is theft. However, Officer Vidal did find the illegal drugs and illegal drug paraphernalia there which resulted in the multiple charges against Kurt.

The conclusion to this matter is that Kurt would be detained, put out on bond and when his trial would take place he would receive a minimum of one year probation plus drug rehabilitation if it is his first criminal offence or a maximum of six months in jail and up to three years’ probation (Schubert, 2015).

  1. The issue here is that when Ana and Summer attempted to rob the bank, when Ana forget the note to ask the teller for the money she backed out of her original plans. As a self-fulfilling prophecy, she picked up a bag with money and a gun and the police arrested both Ana and Summer.

The basic rule of this case is United States criminal code 641 (Schubert, 2015).

For the analysis of this case is that Ana would be charged perhaps not with robbery, but attempted robbery and definite theft. Summer would be charged would being an accessory to Ana’s crime. I ruled out grand theft because although Ana was plotting it, it did not happen. Based on the charges mentioned now, I do believe a judge would agree with them.

In conclusion, Ana would receive potentially 18 months in prison for attempted robbery and theft and be forced to pay restitution (Schubert, 2015). Summer would receive six months in jail and have her driver’s license suspended for a year (Schubert, 2015).

  1. The basic issue here is that Jason is being falsely charged with stealing a monkey that was stolen from the zoo, however being rightfully charged with have a marijuanagrow op in his home. It is Officer Leah who has entered Jason’s home to arrest him when she sees what he is up to.

The basic rules or prima facie are that Jason is charged with grand theft 487e, as well as Title 21 mentioned earlier in the first scenario (Schubert, 2015).

In the analysis, since the criminal defense attorney was able to prove that Jason’s charges for grand theft 487e are unfounded, this charge would be dropped by the judge (Schubert, 2015). Therefore, the case that would be tried before the court would be Jason’s violation of Title 21. With the extent of marijuana possession that Jason had, his jail time would be rather lengthy (Schubert, 2015).

In conclusion, Jason would serve one year in jail for violation of Title 21 due to his marijuana grow op and he would have two years of probation, as well as drug rehabilitation (Schubert, 2015).

References

Schubert, F.A. (2015). Introduction to Law and the Legal System. Boston: Wadsworth Publishing.