Prosecuting Argument
Prosecuting Argument Paper
In presenting its case against, Mr. Stu Dent involving the deceased victim, Uma Opee, the prosecution intends to show the elements of crime are present in each of the charges lodged against the defendant, Stu Dents. Members of the team will provide a specific law for each charge which may be found in one of the following states; Indiana, Minnesota, and Texas. However, the prosecution team has decided that it will pursue this particular case in the great State of Texas, as it feels that it will receive a greater chance of achieving its goal of the severest punishment in the matter.
Argument
The prosecution’s argument is that the defendant is not only guilty of the charges brought against him in the matter of State v. Stu Dents but is liable as well because he knowingly and purposefully committed the crimes on the victim, Uma Opee. All three elements, mens rea, actus reus, and concurrence were present at the time. Mr. Dents was very detailed and meticulous in the manner in which he went about, as he penned in fulfilling his destiny in the journal found by officers in his home. This is considered premeditated. Probable cause has been established in connecting the defendant tothe crime through DNA testing. Officers found mor than 300 photographs stapled to a wall in a locked room located in the back of the defendant’s home. Three counts of possession will be sought for the MDMA also known as ecstasy, cocaine, and methamphetamine drugs found in the defendant’s home. Kidnapping as the victim was taken by force from her place of residence. Signs of cuts and bruises on the victim’s shows Uma put up a struggle. The victim’s hands and feet were tied with rope; particles of which were found in the victim’s home along with blood spots. The victim’s jewelry, specifically an inscribed ring, was found among the defendant’s possession. Lastly, the defendant intentionally assaulted a law enforcement officer when he punched Officer T. Chur in
In presenting its case against, Mr. Stu Dent involving the deceased victim, Uma Opee, the prosecution intends to show the elements of crime are present in each of the charges lodged against the defendant, Stu Dents. Members of the team will provide a specific law for each charge which may be found in one of the following states; Indiana, Minnesota, and Texas. However, the prosecution team has decided that it will pursue this particular case in the great State of Texas, as it feels that it will receive a greater chance of achieving its goal of the severest punishment in the matter.
Argument
The prosecution’s argument is that the defendant is not only guilty of the charges brought against him in the matter of State v. Stu Dents but is liable as well because he knowingly and purposefully committed the crimes on the victim, Uma Opee. All three elements, mens rea, actus reus, and concurrence were present at the time. Mr. Dents was very detailed and meticulous in the manner in which he went about, as he penned in fulfilling his destiny in the journal found by officers in his home. This is considered premeditated. Probable cause has been established in connecting the defendant tothe crime through DNA testing. Officers found mor than 300 photographs stapled to a wall in a locked room located in the back of the defendant’s home. Three counts of possession will be sought for the MDMA also known as ecstasy, cocaine, and methamphetamine drugs found in the defendant’s home. Kidnapping as the victim was taken by force from her place of residence. Signs of cuts and bruises on the victim’s shows Uma put up a struggle. The victim’s hands and feet were tied with rope; particles of which were found in the victim’s home along with blood spots. The victim’s jewelry, specifically an inscribed ring, was found among the defendant’s possession. Lastly, the defendant intentionally assaulted a law enforcement officer when he punched Officer T. Chur in
References: Minnesota Statutes (2012). The Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Retrieved from: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=609.2231 Penal Code Title 5, (2011) Offenses against the Person, Chapter 19; Criminal Homicide, Retrieved from: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.19.htm on 9/11/2013 Punishment Range (2012) Penal Code Offenses. Retrieved from: https://www.oag.state.tx.us/AG_Publications/pdfs/penalcode.pdf on 9/11/2013 Thomas, R. G. (2013). Classes of offenses in Indiana. Retrieved from: http://www.defenselawyerindiana.com/levels.html Schmalleger, F., Hall, D. E., & Dolatowski, J. J. (2010). Criminal Law Today (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall State laws. Retrieved from: http://statelaws.net/Minnesota-Felony.php http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar42/ch3.html