Just another WordPress site
Just another WordPress site
Conduct an internet search to find an ACFR for your local government (city, county, etc.) or a local government that interests you. Then, craft an initial discussion post in which you answer the following:
Assignment Details
In 1961, the search of a residence of Dollree Mapp was done by police with no proper warrant to conduct the search. The search resulted in Mapp eventually being charged and found guilty of possession of pornography and sentenced to seven years in prison. Mapp appealed her conviction and it resulted in the Supreme Court reinforcing the Exclusionary Rule in their decision under the Fourth Amendment.
This video examines the Mapp v. Ohio case (The Federalist Society, 2020):
Using your reading assignment, the content above, and what you have learned about the Exclusionary Rule, answer the following questions:
Reference
The Federalist Society. (2020, April 20). Mapp v. Ohio [SCOTUSbrief] [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/jVl4XD3NkKo
Connect to Content: At least one post must refer to course learning materials. See the Academic Resource on Discussion Boards for help with connecting to the content.
Assignment Details
Plain Sight is one of the types of evidence seizure that is deemed to be an exception to the Exclusionary Rule. The Plain View Doctrine allows for the seizure of evidence by law enforcement if they do not have to search for it because it can be seen without any constructive movement on the part of the officers. The item observed must create probable cause that a crime was committed. The test is simple, if an officer is where he or she is legally and observed an item that provided probable cause, then that item may be seized as evidence and person(s) associated with the item may be arrested.
According to Staff Attorneys (2021) at the Legal Information Institute:
“Plain view doctrine is a rule of criminal procedure which allows an officer to seize evidence of a crime without a warrant when the evidence is clearly visible. This doctrine acts as an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s right to be free from searches without a warrant. Also referred to as clear-view doctrine or plain sight rule.”
This video provides a simple explanation of exceptions to the need for a warrant (LawShelf, 2020):
Scenario: Police are called to Bob Smith’s home as a result of a complaint from neighbors regarding the several large dogs that are constantly barking on his property. Bob lives in a residential neighborhood that has experienced significant change and new development in recent years. While his home is surrounded by a new planned development with matching homes and yards, Bob wouldn’t sell to the developers, so his property still looks like a farm with several buildings (a barn, a storage shed, and other outbuildings). The property is fenced, so Bob doesn’t feel the need to keep the dogs inside. They roam the property and bark at anyone and anything that passes the property, including most cars.
When the officers arrive to talk to Bob, he allows them through the gate and onto his property. While they are talking to Bob about the noise complaints, one officer notices a shed door is partially open, and what looks like a crate of weapons is visible. Officer Jones asks Bob, “What’s with the weapons?” and Bob says, “Those are old relics that I’ve collected.” However, Officer Jones doesn’t believe him and starts walking toward the shed. Bob lunges at Officer Jones and grabs at his gun. The two struggle for the weapon, and just as Bob pulls away with the gun, Officer Baker shoots Bob twice, once in the shoulder, and once in the chest, causing Bob to drop the gun and fall to the ground.
Officer Baker immediately calls for an ambulance, and Officer Jones begins applying pressure to Bob’s wounds and tells him, “Hold on. Help is on the way.” Bob thinks he’s not going to make it and decides that he wants a clear conscience as he moves on to whatever comes next. He tells the officers everything about the guns—where he got them, for what they were going to be used, and with whom Bob was planning his criminal conspiracy to engage in domestic terror by attacking a local rally on LGBT rights the following weekend.
Officer Baker thinks that they should search the other buildings on the property for additional weapons, but Officer Jones doesn’t think they have probable cause to do so. Baker argues that exigent circumstances allow them to conduct a broader search, especially with the first crate of guns in plain view. They do a search of the barn and other buildings on the property, except the main house, and discover two more crates of weapons.
The EMTs ended up arriving in time, and Bob was saved. He now stands trial along with two of his co-conspirators for illegal weapons charges, conspiracy charges, and domestic terrorism charges.
Bob’s defense counsel plans to argue that the plain view doctrine didn’t apply to this case and that everything discovered subsequently should be tossed. Additionally, they plan to argue that because Bob wasn’t actually dying, his dying declaration to the police officers wasn’t valid.
In a 3–4-page paper, address the following:
Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.
References
Staff Legal Information Institute, (2021); Plain view doctrine; Legal Information Institute, WEX Law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plain_view_doctrine_0
LawShelf, 2020. Fourth Amendment: Exceptions to the Warrant Requirement (Part I). [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tL6I2bLLqg
You have been invited to assemble a task force to design a medication assistance program. You need to submit a proposal, regarding who you would invite, to the CEO. Consider the perspectives of prescribers, discharge planners, financial navigators, patients, suppliers, book keepers and subsidizers. If you were to seek the input of 5-7 stakeholders, who would you invite to the planning table, and why? Consider the need for a group facilitator. Who would that person be, and why?
2-3 page APA style response to this query. Open with a paragraph of purpose, dedicate a paragraph to each stakeholder that you would invite, and close with a summary of what you hope to accomplish with the group, within a designated time frame.
The discussion for this week is focused on project implementation. Review the steps in your change process and your schedule for implementation, identify milestones, and discuss how you are going to ensure achievement of these milestones. How has your plan for implementation changed, if at all? Why were these changes necessary? Have you started implementation? (The project will be a case study, no implementation, unfortunately)
Please provide your instructor and student colleagues with an update on the implementation phase of your DNP Project. Share any successes, challenges, or barriers you experienced this week.
When posting, please first share your PICOT question in question format and then respond to the weekly question. This will help us all to be able to provide quality feedback in these weekly discussions.
Your post will be checked in Turnitin for plagiarism. Responses should be a minimum of 350 words, scholarly written, APA formatted, and referenced. A minimum of 3 references are required (other than your textbook).
Why implementation plans and effective project management strategies are an important part of your DNP project preparation and implementation?
Your post will be checked in Turnitin for plagiarism. Responses should be a minimum of 250 words, scholarly written, APA formatted, and referenced. A minimum of 3 references are required (other than your textbook).
To develop your analysis, I would like you to use your own words and paraphrase the ideas of the authors we have been reading. The use of some direct quotes to develop your analysis is also welcome. Please cite specific pages from the readings to support your work, and you should do this even when you are not directly quoting.
Part A. Identify and discuss the significance (2 paragraphs for each answer) of two of the following terms (35 points each, 70 points total). Your answers should draw on the readings and focus on how these terms relate to our understanding of the presidency (including reference to the particular presidents we have focused on in the last modules). Note here that you should also reference the frameworks we have explored rather than just describing the policy. For instance, is it helpful to think about Neustadt’s ideas when discussing Lyndon Johnson and how how he helped pass the Civil Rights Act? Does Skowronek’s theory help us understand Reagan’s policies? How does Grover see OSHA fitting into his ‘structural’ or political economy approach to the presidency?
Pick Two:
Part B. Among the presidents we focused on in the second half of class, which one is most interesting to you and why? Write a short (at least 1 full paragraph) discussion of this question that references at least one example from the readings of a particular policy, political issue, or skill associated with that president. (10 points – there is no wrong answer here, so don’t worry too much about points.)
Answer 1 question (170 points). Please write a 3-4 page (suggested length) work You should write this as clearly as possible and use page citations to support your analysis, but the writing style can be a little more informal than the paper assignments. I might suggest typing it out as if you were in class taking the work, and then going back and adding extra details and page citations (and possibly direct quotes) to strengthen your work:
1. “Political and economic context creates more opportunity for some presidents than for others. But skill determines how well or poorly presidents respond to those opportunities.”
Write work that explores the two sides of this argument while discussing the domestic policy efforts of at least two of the presidents focused on in recent class readings (Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Trump). In other words, please explore how context shapes the possibilities for different presidents, and also consider how their political skills then influence what they accomplish. Make sure you use class frameworks (theories) in your argument. Your work should also provide specific policy examples in relation to each president you are discussing (these can be “successes” and/or “failures” in terms of a given president’s ability to achieve their own policy agenda and related goals).
2. “No one model fully explains the presidency. Instead, we need to combine and contrast insights from multiple models to understand the actions and results of any particular president.”
Is this statement convincing? Write work exploring this argument, assessing the value of applying the different frameworks we have studied to understanding presidential behavior and results. You should focus on the domestic policy of modern presidents, giving concrete examples that support your argument and drawing on a range of perspectives (bargaining /persuasion, going public, political time, structuralism, administrative strategies, etc.). You should discuss in detail at least two modern presidents from among those covered in the last two modules (Johnson, Carter, Reagan, Trump — and also feel free to reference any other examples you find helpful, such as those relating to FDR).
Assignment 1
Subject: Evidence-based Policing
Instructions
This paper requires the student to conduct a scholarly literature review on the subject of evidence-based policing. Students will write an 8-10 page literature review analyzing various qualitative studies on this topic. Students will keep the context within the framework of evidence-based policing, and how it can be beneficial to the criminal justice field.
Option 2: Rene Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy
Explore how Descartes develops his ideas on the nature of the mind in the 2nd Meditation, OF THE NATURE OF THE HUMAN MIND; AND THAT IT IS MORE EASILY KNOWN THAN THE BODY, sections 1-16
A reading guide on this text can be found here:
Franks, Richard, Descartes’ ‘Meditations’: A Reader’s Guide. Continuum (2008)
The text of Descartes 2nd meditation to read can be found here:
Descartes, 2nd Meditation, parts 1-16.
Answer the following questions on a separate document (Microsoft Word .docx), exploring how Descartes develops his ideas on the nature of the mind in the 2nd Meditation.
According to Descartes, what is necessarily true each time it is expressed by me?
What, according to Descartes, am I? What is the nature of the mind?
Exactly what does the argument concluding at the end of the third paragraph of Meditation II prove? Does it prove that Descartes exists? Does it prove that I (the reader) exist? Does it prove to me that I exist? (Are these last two questions different?)
How does Descartes go about imagining himself without a body? Can you really imagine yourself without a body? Can you conceive of having sensations — sights, sounds, smells, etc. — without a body? Could you be without being somewhere and some when?
What does Descartes say is the nature of material bodies? (Is he right?)
In the example of the wax, if the wax really changes all of its sensory qualities (i.e., the qualities that the senses can perceive), then what makes me think there is any one thing here at all? Does any collection of sensory qualities make up the sensations of an object?
What important conclusion about the nature or character of the mind does Descartes draw from the example of the piece of wax?
When a physicist investigates the nature of some element, does he or she concentrate on sensory qualities, or on the underlying atomic structures? Would Descartes call our knowledge of that underlying atomic structure sensory knowledge or rational knowledge?
If Descartes is correct that the essence of the mind is thinking, then how can I ever know whether there are other minds besides my own?