Medical Treatment in Prisons

The discussion assignment provides a forum for discussing relevant topics for this week on the basis of the course competencies covered.

For this assignment, make sure you post your initial response to the Discussion Area by the due date assigned.

To support your work, use your course and text readings and also use the South University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.

Start reviewing and responding to the postings of your classmates as early in the week as possible. Respond to at least two of your classmates’ initial postings. Participate in the discussion by asking a question, providing a statement of clarification, providing a point of view with a rationale, challenging an aspect of the discussion, or indicating a relationship between two or more lines of reasoning in the discussion. Cite sources in your responses to other classmates. Complete your participation for this assignment by the end of the week.

A US prison inmate who had complained of stomach pain was scheduled for a visit to a general practitioner a week after the initial symptoms occurred. The general practitioner prescribed him medication for acidity, but his stomach pain continued. The inmate continued to complain about his stomach pain for another three weeks, but was told to give the medicine more time to cure him.

The prison staff finally scheduled another visit to the general practitioner who in turn scheduled the inmate for test scans a couple of weeks later. The scans showed that the inmate was suffering from stomach cancer.

Surgery was performed immediately to remove the tumor. Surgeons also had to remove a part of his stomach during surgery.

The inmate sued the prison, claiming deliberate cruel and unusual punishment because of the time that passed between his initial complaints and diagnosis.

  • Do you think inmates should be granted the right to medical treatment? Why? If yes, what are the rights they should have? What are the arguments against granting such rights?
  • Do inmates have a right to advanced treatment for medical ailments which can be a financial burden on society? Explain, giving reasons, whether or not the society should bear the heavy cost of treating those whom it has put in prison for anti-social activities.
  • What is deliberate indifference toward a prisoner’s health? Explain with reference to a case. Did the officers show deliberate indifference towards this inmate’s health problem? Why do you think so?
  • Would Estelle v. Gamble (1976) support the inmate’s case? Why? What are the points of similarity and difference in both cases?

Support your responses with adequate research and supporting data. Review and comment on the submissions of at least two of your classmates by the end of the week.

Cite any sources using APA format on a separate page. Let’s learn how to cite sources using APA guidelines.

Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper in which you answer the following questions:

What are the benefits of an evaluation plan?

What are the differences between a process evaluation and an outcome evaluation?

What are the types of budgets used in grant funding? Why are these types of budgets used?

APA format

 

Chandler is a third-year law student in the state of Despair and is in the process of filling out his bar application. One question asks if the applicant has ever been convicted of a crime, including traffic-related violations. Chandler has a misdemeanor drunk driving conviction on his record. Chandler convinces himself that the authorities are really concerned only with felony convictions, and he answers no to the question. Six months later, Chandler takes and passes Despair’s bar examination and joins a large downtown law firm as an associate.

Chandler becomes friendly with Ross, another associate at the firm. One night, Chandler and Ross go out to dinner. Over drinks, Chandler confesses that he was once arrested and convicted for drunk driving. Ross asks him, “How did you handle that on your application for the bar?” Laughing, Chandler says, “Those knuckleheads never found out about the conviction. I didn’t put it on my application and they never asked.” The next day, now sober, Chandler notices that Ross is keeping his distance and acting remote and unresponsive. Fearful that Ross will report him to the grievance committee, Chandler goes to see Joey, an old family friend and well-known criminal defense attorney. Chandler asks Joey for advice on what to do now that Ross knows about the drunk driving conviction. Joey advises Chandler to notify the state bar about the conviction. Joey says, “Confession before Ross reports you is the best step. You’ve had a good record since you were admitted and the Committee may take no action. But you have to tell them.” Chandler leaves Joey’s office and does not notify the bar. Neither Ross nor Joey ever reports Chandler to the bar.

A year later, Chandler decides to move to the state of Nirvana. The bar application in Nirvana asks only if there have been any prior felony convictions. Chandler honestly replies no. Chandler asks Joey to write a letter of recommendation for his admission to the Nirvana state bar. Joey consents and sends the letter to the bar. Joey says nothing about his interview with Chandler or about his conviction. Chandler is admitted to practice law in the state of Nirvana.

Are Chandler, Ross, or Joey subject to discipline? Discuss.

KC Bunyan of the Mudville Nine came to bat in the ninth inning. In the first of his three at-bats, KC had hit a single, a double, and a triple. With a home run, KC would join an elite group of baseball players who had hit for the cycle in a single game.

With a full count, the opposing pitcher threw a blazing fastball over the outside corner of the plate. Casey connected, and the “cycle ball” soared into the sky. The cycle ball cleared the right-field bleachers, landed in the parking lot, and bounced high into the air. The ball came to rest in the front seat of Frank’s convertible, which was parked on a public street outside of the parking lot.

The parking lot attendant, Paul, who had been following the game of his radio, saw the cycle ball bounce into Frank’s car. Paul ran to the car, reached inside, took the cycle ball and put it in his pocket. Paul’s co-worker saw the incident and left a note on Frank’s windshield telling Frank what had happened. Frank read the note after the game ended and learned that the cycle ball had landed inside his car before Paul took the ball from the front seat.

Assume that Paul still has possession of the cycle ball. Frank has filed a conversion claim against Paul seeking the return of the cycle ball. How should the court rule on Frank’s conversion claim?

**Must use IRAC and be 1.5-2 pages in length

Proposal: Cyber Sex Crimes against Children

Assignment Instructions: 

This assignment serves as a building block for your final thesis proposal. For this literature review, you need to select a substantive theory, either something that we discussed in the lesson, or something outside of the course, and focus your literature review around that theory. Your theory selection should make sense with the research question you intend to assess within your final research proposal. Since this is a literature review focused on a particular topic (i.e. the substantive theory) you will need to discuss the current state of the literature specific to that theory (for example, deterrence theory, social identity theory, and etc). You’ll want to start with a discussion on the early conceptualizations of the theory and how it has developed overtime. your conclusion should include a discussion on where the research on that theory needs to go next. What are some questions that remain? What new ways should it be applied?

Format: Standard academic format will suffice: 1-inch borders on all four sides, double spaced, with times new roman 12-point font. As with all academic assignments (unless otherwise specified) you must include a references section and list your references.

This literature review should include a critical review of at least 9-10 scholarly/peer-reviewed articles. 

Since multiple writing styles are in use within this course, on your title page, please note which style you are using within your assignment. This will help me cater my comments to the style you are using. The style you use needs to be the one that is used within your program of study.

Total pages: 5 complete pages in length not including title page, or references.

I have also attached a synthesis matrix that should help you organize your notes as you go, as well as the grading rubric for this assignment.

Use the filename (no spaces): yourlastnameW4.doc to upload this file to the HW4 assignment.

As you proofread your assignment I encourage you to work with Belcher, Wendy Laura. 2009. “Editing Your Sentences” In Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success. Sage. This resource has a nice step by step process for enhancing your writing.

Note: As mentioned above this assignment is a building-block for your final assignment. In your research proposal in addition to synthesizing the literature on a theory, you will also need to synthesize the literature surrounding your topic you are looking to explore as well. This will serve as a preliminary literature review that helps to demonstrate the importance of the topic and show that it has not yet been addressed within the literature.

George Costanza has been offered a position as CEO of Kramerica, a large multinational electronics corporation. Costanza and the president of the Kramerica board, Cosmo Kramer, meet to discuss the terms of the agreement. They sketch out a compensation plan that includes a hefty salary and stock options worth several million dollars. In the spirit of cooperation, Kramer suggests that they use the same attorney to draw the agreement and agrees to have Kramerica pick up the tab. They set up a meeting with Elaine Benes, a well-respected local business attorney.

In the initial meeting, Kramer tells Benes, “We have already outlined all the key factors in George’s contract and just need you to help us formalize the terms. Now I want you to consider yourself as acting for George and for Kramerica, but Kramerica will be solely responsible for your fees. So what do you say, can you help us move this thing forward?”

Benes responds that she would be happy to help them out. She explains that she charges $185 an hour for her services and provides Kramer with a written fee agreement. The parties then discuss the specifics of their deal.

Shortly, thereafter, she phones Costanza to clarify some of the terms. In particular, she wants to know how long the vesting period is supposed to be for the stock options. He says, “Well. To tell you the truth, we never really discussed that. Make it two years. The fact is, I have already committed to move to Sydney in two-and-a-half years when my daughter graduates from law school here. I plan to work for another company over there. Please don’t mention that to Cosmo. It could kill our deal.”

Benes then calls Kramer and asks him what he thinks the vesting period is supposed to be. Kramer says, “I guess we forgot to spell that out in our prior discussions, but Kramerica’s standard vesting policy is 20 percent after three years, another 30 percent after five years, and then the balance after seven years. Just put that in.”

After talking to Kramer, Benes decides, in fairness to both parties, to “split the difference.” She writes up the agreement and presents it to both parties to sign.

Has Benes acted properly under the rules of professional conduct? Discuss.

Squiggy Squigman retained attorney Laverne DeFazio to represent him on a federal bank robbery charge. The indictment charged that Squigman had robbed Milwaukee Bank on Shotz Street. The prosecutor’s case depended in part on photographic evidence obtained from hidden cameras in the bank. None of the photographs clearly depicted the robber’s face.

At their first meeting, Squigman told DeFazio that, at the time of the robbery, he was watching television at the home of his friend Shirley Feeney.

While reviewing the evidence, DeFazio noticed that one of the bank photographs showed the robber wearing a ring on the fourth finger of his right hand. Later, at one of their trial preparation sessions, DeFazio saw that Squigman had a ring on the same finger. DeFazio mentioned this to Squigman, and the following conversation occurred:

Squigman: So what? Lots of people wear rings on that finger and lots of rings look like this one.

DeFazio: Yours has a “B” on it.

Squigman: You can’t see the one in the bank photo clearly enough to see if there’s a “B” on that one.

DeFazio: You might be able to if they blow it up.

After the meeting ended, Squigman removed the ring and DeFazio never saw it again. In a subsequent meeting, DeFazio noticed a tan ring line on Squigman’s finger and said, “The DA may ask you about the ring line on your finger.” Squigman did not respond.

During the trial, but before he testified, Squigman asked DeFazio what he should do if the prosecutor asks him if he owned a ring with a “B” on it.

“If you insist on testifying, you have to tell the truth,” DeFazio said.

The night before closing arguments were scheduled to begin, Squigman gave DeFazio the balance of her legal fee in $100 bills. DeFazio noticed that the serial numbers on 14 of the $100 bills corresponded to the serial numbers identified during the testimony of a bank officer as the numbers on some of the stolen bills.

DeFazio returned all 14 of the $100 bills to Squigman and told him to bring an equivalent sum in other denominations. The following morning, Squigman came to court with bills in various denominations, which DeFazio accepted.

In her closing argument, DeFazio argued that the prosecutor was going after the wrong man and urged the jury to believe Shirley Feeney’s testimony confirming Squiggy’s alibi.

What standards of professional responsibility, if any, has DeFazio violated by her conduct in representing Squigman? Discuss.

Frasier is a successful criminal defense attorney. For the past six months, she has been doing televised trial commentary on a notorious murder trial involving a former football star. Her comments are considered sharp and perceptive, and she has gained national recognition. She has recently received numerous other offers to appear on television. One afternoon, Frasier appears on a live talk show with three other attorneys to discuss the general state of law. The panel takes questions from phone callers. The callers are asked to use their first names only in order to protect their privacy.

A young woman name Daphne calls and directs her question to all of the lawyers on the panel: “I have just received a subpoena to be a witness at my brother’s criminal trial and I don’t want to testify. Is there anything I can do to avoid appearing?” Just as one of the attorneys is about to answer the question, Frasier interrupts and says, “I believe that I’m the most qualified person to help Daphne with her problem because I have such extensive criminal trial experience and am looked upon across the country as an expert in this area. Daphne, before I can help you, I need to know more about why you don’t want to testify.” Daphne responds, “I’m afraid that I might be arrested if they find out I helped my brother.” Frasier responds, “Daphne, why don’t you call my office at 555-6800 to set up an appointment? You are definitely in need of professional help, but your situation requires more detailed advice than I can give you here or over the phone. Don’t worry: I have gotten many a client out of similar jams.”

When the television program ends, Frasier stops by the station’s newsroom and delivers two front-row tickets to the most popular play in town to the news director. Frasier says to the director, “This is just my way of saying thank you for the interview that you did with me last week. My phone has been ringing off the hook ever since. Lots of new clients.”

Has Frasier violated any standards of professional responsibility? Discuss.

An IRAC-style essay is needed

 

Ella is a trained paralegal who works for ABC Bank in Tucson, Arizona. One day, Barry walks into the bank to apply for a mortgage loan to purchase a new house. Ella and Barry have a long conversation about Barry taking out a mortgage. During the conversation, Barry is concerned that were he to default on his loan, his credit would be destroyed.

In response, Ella tells him:

Don’t worry about it. If you don’t pay your loan, the only remedy the bank has is to foreclose on the house. The bank cannot go after you personally and your credit score will be unaffected. I’ve been dealing with this issue for years and I’m telling you that this is the Arizona law on the matter.

Unfortunately, it turns out that Ella was incorrect. When Barry defaults on his loan the next year, his credit is badly hurt.

Barry comes to your office and meets with your supervising attorney, Rick, to discuss the possibility of suing Ella based on her statement to him and his reliance on it. Because Barry sincerely believed that what she was saying was true, Rick immediately rules out the possibility of suing her for fraud or misrepresentation. (Note: This means you should NOT deal with the possibility of suing him for fraud or misrepresentation or the like!)

Instead, Barry says to Rick, “Well, Ella isn’t a lawyer. Isn’t it wrong for her to tell me what the Arizona law is when she’s not even a lawyer?” Rick replies, “Well, I know that it’s unethical and even criminal to practice law without a license, but I don’t know if you can sue someone for unauthorized practice of law. I’ll have my star paralegal look into that.”

After Barry leaves, Rick asks you to research this question, i.e., whether Barry can sue Ella based on her unauthorized practice of law, and to get back to him with an answer. Please prepare a properly researched essay to answer Rick’s question. Please refer to Arizona Supreme Court Rule 31.

Constitutional Law

In this unit, we are studying the power that may be exercised by the executive branch.  Select only 1 of the following cases, and respond to the questions in a 4–5-page paper (choose only 1 case)Case 1: Read the case  Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), and answer the following questions:

· Summarize the facts of the case in your own words.

· Summarize the law that was passed to exclude certain foreign nationals.

· What did the Court state about the justiciability of this case?

· What did the Court state about the plaintiffs’ standing to file the lawsuit?

· What did the Court state regarding the president’s authority to pass this law?

· Finally, discuss whether you agree with the majority or with the dissenting justices. Explain your answer.

OR

Case 2:

Read the case of  Zivotofsky v. Kerry, 576 U.S. ___(2015), and answer the following questions:

· Summarize the facts of the case in your own words.

· Summarize the law that was passed to exclude certain foreign nationals.

· What did the Court state about the justiciability of this case?

· What did the Court state about the plaintiffs’ standing to file the lawsuit?

· What did the Court state about the conflict between Congress’s authority to pass the statute and the president’s authority to recognize a foreign sovereign?

· Finally, discuss whether you agree with the majority or with the dissenting justices. Explain your answer.

References

Oyez. (n.d.). Trump v. Hawaii. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/17-965

Oyez. (n.d.). Zivotofsky v. Kerry. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/13-628