1. Blueford v. Arkansas 2011: This was one of the cases that caught my attention because it deals with the statement of Double Jeopardy, which has very indistinct lines actual practice. This case would help clear up where and when Double Jeopardy can be used or not. The Constitutional issues that are involved in this case is whether the defendant can exclaim Double Jeopardy for offences that were ruled in favor of him, but the court was declared a mistrial. This case wasn't decided on yet, but I would vote that the defendant cannot use Double Jeopardy because the overall case was declared a mistrial.
2. Coleman v. Maryland Court of Appeals 2011: This case caught my eye because it deals with the question whether a former Maryland Court of Appeals employee can file for a lawsuit due to the court firing him after he requested sick leave. This issue encompasses the 11th Amendment on whether the citizen can justify the law suit. The case has not been decided yet, but I would vote that it is constitutional for the court to deny the law suit.
3. Filarsky v. Delia 2011: This case was interesting because it addresses whether an individual is precluded from claiming qualified immunities because they are a private lawyer and not a government employee. This case raises the issue of a person's rights to certain immunities. This case hasn't been decided on yet, but I would say that he is allowed to have the immunities.
The 11th Amend! Had to refresh my memory on that. Interesting cases...
ReplyDeleteI also found Blueford V. Arkansas interesting. The concept of double jeopardy can be vague at times and there is much debate over when/how it is used. However, I disagree with you. I think the defendant should be able to exclaim double jeopardy due to the fact that the case was declared a mistrial.
ReplyDelete