preview

Jury Duty And Court Cases

Decent Essays

Jury Duty and Court Cases Based on the United States Constitution, all citizens have the right to a “Trial by Jury,” which is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision in order to direct the actions of a judge. A jury pool is randomly selected first, and then the potential jurors are notified. After, “Voir Dire,” or jury selection, occurs where twelve people are chosen for jury duty. The opinions of citizens differ greatly based on whether or not they believe that serving jury duty is a privilege, responsibility, burden, or even unnecessary. According to Kris, a neighbor of mine, the process of being selected as a juror is tedious, but she enjoys being a juror. She has only served in one case, but feels that as citizens it is …show more content…

Sean Lowe and the People of New York v. Keesshawn Nesbitt. In People v. Lowe, the court decided on January 13, 2015, that Lowe was guilty of endangering the welfare of a child under Penal Law § 260.10(1). On June 28, 2014, after a firefighter could not immediately revive the defendant on a public street while his two children in his care, one of the children being supervised by a stranger on the street and the other “missing” according to the defendant himself, it was finally established from an EMT technician called to the scene that Lowe was highly intoxicated under the influence of a controlled substance. Both the EMT technician and firefighter smelled a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage emanating from the defendant; however, when they reported it the firefighter only mentioned that the defendant seemed under the influence of a controlled substance. For this reason, Lowe tried to fight the case by using that as a Misdemeanor Complaint but it failed to be converted into one, because the information of the eyewitnesses, using either terminology, was facially sufficient. Next in order, in People v. Nesbitt, the court decided on September 17, 2015, that the defendant was guilty after a deponent witnessed him enter an informants car without permission while carrying a backpack with an unlicensed imitation firearm/air pistol, pellets for an air pistol, and a bullet proof vest inside. The air pistol apparently looked, felt, and weighed the same as a real pistol with a propelling force of air and not orange rubber stop on the tip. The court decided that under Penal Law § 165.05 Nesbitt is criminalized due to unauthorized vehicle usage despite whether or not he did or intended to operate the vehicle, along with the Administrative Code of the City of New York § 10-131 (g) (1) that prohibits the possession of imitation firearms and the unlicensed possession of air pistols. I agree with the court’s

Get Access