Summarize and discuss the People v. Cervantes case. Explain the court’s distinction between dependent intervening and independent intervening acts. What did the court find? Do you agree with the ruling? Why or why not?
What will be an ideal response?
The court found the defendant not guilty for the death of Cabrera because the murder was unforeseeable. Students must summarize the case by providing details such as what the prosecutors and the defense argued. Students must sufficiently discuss the difference between the intervening causes, then provide their opinion on whether they agree with the ruling on the case or not.
You might also like to view...
Common forms of misconduct are excessive use of physical or deadly force, discriminatory arrest, physical or verbal harassment, and selective enforcement of the law
a. True b. False
The theory of the Stockholm Syndrome is used to describe terrorist tendencies within which explanatory discipline?
a. sociological explanations of terrorism b. criminological explanations of terrorism c. psychological explanations of terrorism d. physiological explanations of terrorism
During the 1960s, the rise of ______ became popular, which aimed at eliminating discrimination and demanding an end to the suppression of political dissent.
A. social movements B. McCarthyism c. feminism D. radical criminology
An example of corroborative evidence would be:
a. testimony of two witnesses whose description of the scene to almost identical. b. a fact that is established by the use of a rebuttable presumption. c. a fact that is established when the judge took judicial notice. d. real (physical) evidence that supports the testimony of a witness.