Compare and contrast how you would expect nursing leaders and managers to approach your selected issue.

Write a 1,000-1,250-word essay describing the differing approaches of nursing leaders and managers to issues in practice. To complete this assignment, do the following:

  1. Select an issue from the following list: nursing shortage and nurse turn-over, nurse staffing ratios, unit closures and restructuring, use of contract employees (i.e., registry and travel nurses), continuous quality improvement and patient satisfaction, and magnet designation.
  2. Compare and contrast how you would expect nursing leaders and managers to approach your selected issue. Support your rationale by using the theories, principles, skills, and roles of the leader versus manager described in your readings.
  3. Identify the approach that best fits your personal and professional philosophy of nursing and explain why the approach is suited to your personal leadership style.
  4. Use at least two references other than your text and those provided in the course.

Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.

Case Study 1: Understanding the Court System

Due Week 3 and worth 200 points

The U.S. Court System is a complex system that includes both federal and state-level courts. The federal system includes the judicial branch of the government. This system is designed to help society interpret the U.S. Constitution and provide guidelines for society. Court cases may concern many different topics and have an unlimited number of outcomes.

Use the Internet or Strayer databases to research a civil or criminal court case in which you are interested.

Write a five to eight (5-8) page paper in which you:

  1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
  2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
  3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
  4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
  5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision.
  6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response.
  7. Use at least (3) quality academic resources. Note: Wikipedia and other websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Examine the organizational frameworks and decision-making environment in the judicial process.
  • Examine the rule of law in the American court system and in the judicial process.
  • Detail the history and organization of the levels of the American court system and the issue of jurisdictional boundaries.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in the criminal court and the judicial process in America.
  • Write clearly and concisely about the American court system using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

  • Grid View
  • List View
Unacceptable Below 60% F Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D Fair 70-79% C Proficient 80-89% B Exemplary 90-100% A
SOC205-CS1-1

1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose. Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
Insufficiently summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
Partially summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:16 (8%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Satisfactorily summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20 (10%)
Thoroughly summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-2

2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-3

3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
SOC205-CS1-4

4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and did not submit or incompletely included any related jurisdictional requirements. Did not submit or incompletely explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and insufficiently included any related jurisdictional requirements. Insufficiently explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and partially included any related jurisdictional requirements. Partially explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and satisfactorily included any related jurisdictional requirements. Satisfactorily explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and thoroughly included any related jurisdictional requirements. Thoroughly explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
SOC205-CS1-5

5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the outcome of the case, and did not submit or incompletely indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently summarized the outcome of the case, and insufficiently indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially summarized the outcome of the case, and partially indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily summarized the outcome of the case, and satisfactorily indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly summarized the outcome of the case, and thoroughly indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
SOC205-CS1-6

6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Insufficiently provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Partially provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Thoroughly provided a rationale for the response.
SOC205-CS1-7

7. 3 references Weight: 5%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 5.98(2.99%)
No references provided
Points Range:6 (3%) – 6.98(3.49%)
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Points Range:7 (3.5%) – 7.98(3.99%)
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Points Range:8 (4%) – 8.98(4.49%)
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Points Range:9 (4.5%) – 10 (5%)
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
SOC205-CS1-8

8. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
More than 8 errors present
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
7-8 errors present
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
5-6 errors prese

Examine the organizational frameworks and decision-making environment in the judicial process.

Case Study 1: Understanding the Court System

Due Week 3 and worth 200 points

The U.S. Court System is a complex system that includes both federal and state-level courts. The federal system includes the judicial branch of the government. This system is designed to help society interpret the U.S. Constitution and provide guidelines for society. Court cases may concern many different topics and have an unlimited number of outcomes.

Use the Internet or Strayer databases to research a civil or criminal court case in which you are interested.

Write a five to eight (5-8) page paper in which you:

  1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
  2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
  3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
  4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
  5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision.
  6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response.
  7. Use at least (3) quality academic resources. Note: Wikipedia and other websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Examine the organizational frameworks and decision-making environment in the judicial process.
  • Detail the history and organization of the levels of the American court system and the issue of jurisdictional boundaries.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in the criminal court and the judicial process in America.
  • Write clearly and concisely about the American court system using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

  • Grid View
  • List View
Unacceptable Below 60% F Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D Fair 70-79% C Proficient 80-89% B Exemplary 90-100% A
SOC205-CS1-1

1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose. Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
Insufficiently summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
Partially summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:16 (8%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Satisfactorily summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20 (10%)
Thoroughly summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-2

2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-3

3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
SOC205-CS1-4

4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and did not submit or incompletely included any related jurisdictional requirements. Did not submit or incompletely explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and insufficiently included any related jurisdictional requirements. Insufficiently explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and partially included any related jurisdictional requirements. Partially explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and satisfactorily included any related jurisdictional requirements. Satisfactorily explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and thoroughly included any related jurisdictional requirements. Thoroughly explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
SOC205-CS1-5

5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the outcome of the case, and did not submit or incompletely indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently summarized the outcome of the case, and insufficiently indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially summarized the outcome of the case, and partially indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily summarized the outcome of the case, and satisfactorily indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly summarized the outcome of the case, and thoroughly indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
SOC205-CS1-6

6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Insufficiently provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Partially provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Thoroughly provided a rationale for the response.
SOC205-CS1-7

7. 3 references Weight: 5%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 5.98(2.99%)
No references provided
Points Range:6 (3%) – 6.98(3.49%)
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Points Range:7 (3.5%) – 7.98(3.99%)
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Points Range:8 (4%) – 8.98(4.49%)
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Points Range:9 (4.5%) – 10 (5%)
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
SOC205-CS1-8

8. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
More than 8 errors present
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
7-8 errors present
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
5-6 errors prese

Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.

Case Study 1: Understanding the Court System

Due Week 3 and worth 200 points

The U.S. Court System is a complex system that includes both federal and state-level courts. The federal system includes the judicial branch of the government. This system is designed to help society interpret the U.S. Constitution and provide guidelines for society. Court cases may concern many different topics and have an unlimited number of outcomes.

Use the Internet or Strayer databases to research a civil or criminal court case in which you are interested.

Write a five to eight (5-8) page paper in which you:

  1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
  2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
  3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
  4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
  5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision.
  6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response.
  7. Use at least (3) quality academic resources. Note: Wikipedia and other websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Examine the organizational frameworks and decision-making environment in the judicial process.
  • Examine the rule of law in the American court system and in the judicial process.
  • Detail the history and organization of the levels of the American court system and the issue of jurisdictional boundaries.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in the criminal court and the judicial process in America.
  • Write clearly and concisely about the American court system using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

  • Grid View
  • List View
Unacceptable Below 60% F Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D Fair 70-79% C Proficient 80-89% B Exemplary 90-100% A
SOC205-CS1-1

1. Summarize the seminal facts of the case that you chose. Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
Insufficiently summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
Partially summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:16 (8%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Satisfactorily summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20 (10%)
Thoroughly summarized the seminal facts of the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-2

2. Explain the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained the main laws that have been violated in the case that you chose.
SOC205-CS1-3

3. Describe the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly described the possible penalties that could be associated with the laws that you just described.
SOC205-CS1-4

4. Explain whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and include any related jurisdictional requirements. Explain the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and did not submit or incompletely included any related jurisdictional requirements. Did not submit or incompletely explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and insufficiently included any related jurisdictional requirements. Insufficiently explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and partially included any related jurisdictional requirements. Partially explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and satisfactorily included any related jurisdictional requirements. Satisfactorily explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly explained whether your specific case was heard in the state or federal court system, and thoroughly included any related jurisdictional requirements. Thoroughly explained the fundamental reasons why it was necessary for the case to be heard in that particular court system.
SOC205-CS1-5

5. Summarize the outcome of the case, and indicate whether the judge or jury made the decision. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely summarized the outcome of the case, and did not submit or incompletely indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently summarized the outcome of the case, and insufficiently indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially summarized the outcome of the case, and partially indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily summarized the outcome of the case, and satisfactorily indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly summarized the outcome of the case, and thoroughly indicated whether the judge or jury made the decision.
SOC205-CS1-6

6. Discuss whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Provide a rationale for the response. Weight: 15%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 17.98(8.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:18 (9%) – 20.98(10.49%)
Insufficiently discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Insufficiently provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:21 (10.5%) – 23.98(11.99%)
Partially discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Partially provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:24 (12%) – 26.98(13.49%)
Satisfactorily discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for the response.
Points Range:27 (13.5%) – 30(15%)
Thoroughly discussed whether or not you believe that the outcome of the case was justified. Thoroughly provided a rationale for the response.
SOC205-CS1-7

7. 3 references Weight: 5%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 5.98(2.99%)
No references provided
Points Range:6 (3%) – 6.98(3.49%)
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Points Range:7 (3.5%) – 7.98(3.99%)
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Points Range:8 (4%) – 8.98(4.49%)
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Points Range:9 (4.5%) – 10 (5%)
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
SOC205-CS1-8

8. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%

Points Range:0 (0%) – 11.98(5.99%)
More than 8 errors present
Points Range:12 (6%) – 13.98(6.99%)
7-8 errors present
Points Range:14 (7%) – 15.98(7.99%)
5-6 errors prese

Explain the values of the company and its policy on race and gender discrimination.

Based on your readings and additional research, develop a position statement, including the following:

  • Explain the values of the company and its policy on race and gender discrimination.
  • Summarize and comment on the facts in the EEOC claim.
  • Explain the company’s position on the EEOC claim.

Write a 2–3-page paper in Word format based on EEOC recommendations for your position statement. Apply APA standards to citation of sources. Use the following file naming convention: LastnameFirstInitial_M2_A2.doc.

By Wednesday, January 20, 2016, deliver your assignment to the M2: Assignment 2 Dropbox.

Assignment 2 Grading Criteria
Maximum Points
Explained company values and policy regarding race and gender discrimination.
36
Analyzed the EEOC claim and evaluated its merits.
28
Explained the company’s position on the EEOC claim.
24
Wrote in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrated ethical scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; displayed accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

Identify which features of these two traditions you saw as non-comparable.

Respond

In a well-organized essay, address the following:

  1. While reading about any of the non-Western traditions, identify at least three traditions that you mentally compared to some theory in Western philosophy? How are they similar?
  2. Identify which features of these two traditions you saw as non-comparable. How are the two traditions different? If you had grown up in the non-Western culture, do you think you would prefer these two traditions over the ones to which you have been enculturated in our Western society? Why or why not?
  3. When you consider that Asian philosophy predates Western philosophy and religion, why do you think that it was not more influential on Western thinking?
  4. How has noting and writing about the comparisons change your opinion concerning the non-Western traditions? If your opinion has not changed, explain why you think it has not changed.

Please ensure that your essay addresses each component of the assigned questions and that your answer is well-organized, uses excellent, college-level prose, and makes judicious use of textual evidence. Your essay must follow APA formatting and should be 500-750 words long.

If you quote, paraphrase, or summarize from the textbook or any other source, you must include in-text citati

Describe the task being performed when the risk might occur (washing dishes, moving a desk, etc.).

Ashford 5: – Week 4 – Assignment

Risk Assessment Plan

We all face potential hazards in our workplaces and in our homes. Ideally we can eliminate or control many of these; however, if and when they occur, a Risk Assessment Plan is our best defense. To understand the preparation and use of such a plan, consider your past or present workplace or your home.

  1. Identify at least three possible risks that exist in your workplace or home.
  2. For each of the three or more risks:
    • Describe the task being performed when the risk might occur (washing dishes, moving a desk, etc.).
    • Locate where the risk may occur (office, garage, etc.).
    • Describe the hazard type (shock, fall, etc.).
    • Summarize the consequences of the risk (death, fire, etc.).
    • Prepare a description of how to control the hazard once it occurs (dilute, neutralize, etc.).
    • Choose what personal safety equipment, tools, or other items that should be readily available in advance of the hazard occurring.

Writing the Paper

  1. Must be three to four double-spaced pages in length (not including the title and reference pages), and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  2. Must include a title page with the following:
    • Title of paper
    • Student’s name
    • Course name and number
    • Instructor’s name
    • Date submitted
  3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.
  4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.
  5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.
  6. Must use at least four scholarly sources, including a minimum of two from the Ashford Online Library.
  7. Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  8. Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Discuss the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and justify its validity in the courts holding for the Katz v United Statescase.

Assignment 1: Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights

Due Week 4 and worth 150 points

 

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens against police officers making unreasonable searches and seizures of personal property. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee the procedures that the courts and police must use to ensure fair treatment of persons arrested for crimes.

 

Analyze the following cases in preparation for a systematic approach for a synthesis of law and fact.

 

Review each of the follow cases:

 

Write an eight to ten (8-10) page paper in which you:

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  2. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case. Justify your position.
  3. Explore the overall importance of the Fifth Amendment rights. Suggest key events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated the fundamental nature of one’s Fifth Amendment right. Justify your response.
  4. Examine three (3) instances in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  5. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the Court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy. Justify the validity of the test in the courts holding for the Katz v United States case.
  6. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v. United States.
  7. Use at least two (2) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

 

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

 

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Illustrate the workings of the adversary system.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in U.S. Courts.
  • Write clearly and concisely about U.S. Courts using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Click here to view the rubric.

 

 

Points: 150 Assignment 1: Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights
Criteria  

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

 

Fair

70-79% C

 

Proficient

80-89% B

 

Exemplary

90-100% A

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Weight: 15%
Did not submit or incompletely prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Insufficiently prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Partially prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Satisfactorily prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Thoroughly prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  1. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and provide justification for your position.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and did not submit or incompletely determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and did not submit or incompletely provided justification for your position. Insufficiently examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and insufficiently determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and insufficiently provided justification for your position. Partially examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and partially determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and partially provided justification for your position. Satisfactorily examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and satisfactorily determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and satisfactorily provided justification for your position. Thoroughly examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and thoroughly determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and thoroughly provided justification for your position.
  1. Specify the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Justify your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from theMiranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response. Insufficiently specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Insufficiently justified your response. Partially specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Partially justified your response. Satisfactorily specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Satisfactorily justified your response. Thoroughly specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Thoroughly justified your response.
  1. Examine three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Did not submit or incompletely provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Insufficiently examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Insufficiently provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Partially examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Partially provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Satisfactorily examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Satisfactorily provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Thoroughly examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Thoroughly provided examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  1. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and justify its validity in the courts holding for the Katz v United Statescase.

Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and did not submit or incompletely justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Insufficiently discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and insufficiently justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Partially discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and partially justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Satisfactorily discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and satisfactorily justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Thoroughly discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and thoroughly justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase.
  1. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v. United States.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v United States. Insufficiently analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Partially analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Satisfactorily analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Thoroughly analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States.
6. 2 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present 7-8 errors present 5-6 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present

 

Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and provide justification for your position.

Assignment 1: Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights

Due Week 4 and worth 150 points

 

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens against police officers making unreasonable searches and seizures of personal property. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee the procedures that the courts and police must use to ensure fair treatment of persons arrested for crimes.

 

Analyze the following cases in preparation for a systematic approach for a synthesis of law and fact.

 

Review each of the follow cases:

 

Write an eight to ten (8-10) page paper in which you:

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  2. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case. Justify your position.
  3. Explore the overall importance of the Fifth Amendment rights. Suggest key events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated the fundamental nature of one’s Fifth Amendment right. Justify your response.
  4. Examine three (3) instances in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  5. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the Court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy. Justify the validity of the test in the courts holding for the Katz v United States case.
  6. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v. United States.
  7. Use at least two (2) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

 

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

 

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Illustrate the workings of the adversary system.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in U.S. Courts.
  • Write clearly and concisely about U.S. Courts using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Click here to view the rubric.

 

 

Points: 150 Assignment 1: Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights
Criteria  

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

 

Fair

70-79% C

 

Proficient

80-89% B

 

Exemplary

90-100% A

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Weight: 15%
Did not submit or incompletely prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Insufficiently prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Partially prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Satisfactorily prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Thoroughly prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  1. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and provide justification for your position.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and did not submit or incompletely determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and did not submit or incompletely provided justification for your position. Insufficiently examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and insufficiently determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and insufficiently provided justification for your position. Partially examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and partially determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and partially provided justification for your position. Satisfactorily examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and satisfactorily determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and satisfactorily provided justification for your position. Thoroughly examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and thoroughly determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and thoroughly provided justification for your position.
  1. Specify the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Justify your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from theMiranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response. Insufficiently specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Insufficiently justified your response. Partially specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Partially justified your response. Satisfactorily specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Satisfactorily justified your response. Thoroughly specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Thoroughly justified your response.
  1. Examine three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Did not submit or incompletely provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Insufficiently examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Insufficiently provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Partially examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Partially provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Satisfactorily examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Satisfactorily provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Thoroughly examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Thoroughly provided examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  1. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and justify its validity in the courts holding for the Katz v United Statescase.

Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and did not submit or incompletely justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Insufficiently discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and insufficiently justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Partially discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and partially justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Satisfactorily discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and satisfactorily justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Thoroughly discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and thoroughly justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase.
  1. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v. United States.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v United States. Insufficiently analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Partially analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Satisfactorily analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Thoroughly analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States.
6. 2 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present 7-8 errors present 5-6 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present

 

Examine three (3) instances in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure.

signment 1: Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights

Due Week 4 and worth 150 points

 

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects citizens against police officers making unreasonable searches and seizures of personal property. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments guarantee the procedures that the courts and police must use to ensure fair treatment of persons arrested for crimes.

 

Analyze the following cases in preparation for a systematic approach for a synthesis of law and fact.

 

Review each of the follow cases:

 

Write an eight to ten (8-10) page paper in which you:

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  2. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case. Justify your position.
  3. Explore the overall importance of the Fifth Amendment rights. Suggest key events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated the fundamental nature of one’s Fifth Amendment right. Justify your response.
  4. Examine three (3) instances in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  5. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the Court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy. Justify the validity of the test in the courts holding for the Katz v United States case.
  6. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v. United States.
  7. Use at least two (2) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

 

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

 

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Illustrate the workings of the adversary system.
  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in U.S. Courts.
  • Write clearly and concisely about U.S. Courts using proper writing mechanics and APA style conventions.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Click here to view the rubric.

 

 

Points: 150 Assignment 1: Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment Rights
Criteria  

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

 

Fair

70-79% C

 

Proficient

80-89% B

 

Exemplary

90-100% A

  1. Prepare a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Weight: 15%
Did not submit or incompletely prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Insufficiently prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance: a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Partially prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Satisfactorily prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome. Thoroughly prepared a two to three (2-3) page briefing from one of the following two (1-2) cases that you reviewed in which  you utilized the following areas of importance:a) issue presented; b) short answer; c) the facts of the case; d) a summary of the case; and e) a conclusion of the case outcome.
  1. Examine the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and determine which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and provide justification for your position.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and did not submit or incompletely determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and did not submit or incompletely provided justification for your position. Insufficiently examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and insufficiently determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and insufficiently provided justification for your position. Partially examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and partially determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and partially provided justification for your position. Satisfactorily examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and satisfactorily determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and satisfactorily provided justification for your position. Thoroughly examined the importance of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and thoroughly determined which amendment offers the greatest protection for defendants in a typical U.S. court case and thoroughly provided justification for your position.
  1. Specify the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which you believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Justify your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from theMiranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response. Insufficiently specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Insufficiently justified your response. Partially specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Partially justified your response. Satisfactorily specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Satisfactorily justified your response. Thoroughly specified the importance of the Fifth Amendment by suggesting events from the Miranda v Arizona case in which believe law enforcement had violated this fundamental right. Thoroughly justified your response.
  1. Examine three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Provide examples of such occurrences to support your response.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Did not submit or incompletely provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Insufficiently examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Insufficiently provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Partially examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Partially provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Satisfactorily examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Satisfactorily provided examples of such occurrences to support your response. Thoroughly examined three (3) occurrences in which the Fourth Amendment protects you against unlawful search and seizure. Thoroughly provided examples of such occurrences to support your response.
  1. Discuss the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and justify its validity in the courts holding for the Katz v United Statescase.

Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and did not submit or incompletely justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Insufficiently discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and insufficiently justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Partially discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and partially justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Satisfactorily discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and satisfactorily justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase. Thoroughly discussed the two prong test articulated by the court which determines the actual nature of a reasonable expectation of privacy and thoroughly justified its validity in the courts holding for Katz v United Statescase.
  1. Analyze whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v. United States.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding in Katz v United States. Insufficiently analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Partially analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Satisfactorily analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States. Thoroughly analyzed whether or not today’s standards allowing government access to all electronic technologies through legislation, like the Uniting and Strengthening America By Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T.) Act of 2001, have effectively negated the holding inKatz v United States.
6. 2 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

Weight: 10%

More than 8 errors present 7-8 errors present 5-6 errors present 3-4 errors present 0-2 errors present