Geomorphology Lab Report Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Geomorphology - Lab Report Example This problem affects many Americans. The term ‘IPV’ can be used to describe the sexual, physical, or psychological harm from a former or current spouse or partner. The violence can happen in same sex or heterosexual couples and does not need any sexual intimacy. The four types of IPV include physical violence, sexual violence, emotional or psychological violence, and threats of sexual or physical violence. These definitions are important because they help in monitoring the IPV incidences and examining the trends for certain duration of time. The definitions help in determining the potential of IPV and making the comparison of the problems in the whole jurisdiction. Fine definitions assist researchers in measuring the protective factors and risks involved in victimization. This informs the intervention and prevention efforts. The department will perform a child protective report investigation on child abuse, neglect and abandonment. After this, the department will make the application to the court for an action of continuous restriction against the individual responsible for managing the mental health, physical health and the children welfare care. Saltzman, L., Fanslow, J., McMahon, P., & Shelley, G. (2002). Intimate partner violence surveillance: uniform definitions and recommended data elements, version 1.0. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and

Case briefs Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Case briefs - Assignment Example The case went through the court of first trial all the way to the Supreme Court. At the court of first trial, a suppression motion was granted to the defendant. This is because the court found out that the search warrant that had been issued earlier was not based on a feasible cause. To be specific, the court contended that that search warrant was surrounded by contentions of an untested informer and inadequate validation by the police. Upon the subsequent trial to the Court of Appeal, the court affirmed the decision of the court of first trial. The Court of Appeal declined the exclusionary rule that was put forward of good faith. Lastly, when the case reached the Supreme Court of the U.S, certiorari was granted. The legal issue that was in this case was whether the exclusionary rule to the fourth amendment should be amended so as to permit the usage of evidence acquired by police officers acting in judicious dependence on a search warrant dispensed by an isolated and impartial magistrate but eventually established to be uncorroborated by credible cause. The court held that the exclusionary rule ought to be amended so as allow the use of evidence acquired in the justifiable belief of acting under good faith that a given search warrant conformed to the said fourth amendment. Justice White stated that the exclusionary rule to the fourth amendment ought to be amended so as to allow the use of evidence acquired in the justifiable belief of good faith that an issued search warrant complied with the provisions of the fourth amendment. He argued that the exclusionary rule was a judicial-made remedy and not a constitutional right. He said that the rule’s main objective is to deter the misconducts that may be occasioned by the police officers. He further contended that it can be amended if the police officers have tangible evidence that can be used if it can be shown that the