Leg 320 week 7 assignment 2: criminal defenses and criminal

Category: Law

Points: 170

Assignment 2: Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments

Criteria

 

Unacceptable
Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D

 

Fair
70-79% C

 

Proficient
80-89% B

 

Exemplary
90-100% A

1. Specify the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Next, evaluate the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.
Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.

Insufficiently specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Insufficiently evaluated the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.

Partially specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Partially evaluated the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.

Satisfactorily specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Satisfactorily evaluated the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.

Thoroughly specified the key points involved in the court determining the lawfulness of the use of force. Thoroughly evaluated the level of objectivity inherent in each point that you have specified.

2. Determine the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses.  Justify the validity of each, and provide one (1) example of each to support your response.
Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely determined the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses. Did not submit or incompletely justified the validity of each, and did not submit or incompletely provided one (1) example of each to support your response.

Insufficiently determined the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses.  Insufficiently justified the validity of each, and insufficiently provided one (1) example of each to support your response.

Partially determined the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses.  Partially justified the validity of each, and partially provided one (1) example of each to support your response.

Satisfactorily determined the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses. Satisfactorily justified the validity of each, and satisfactorily provided one (1) example of each to support your response.

Thoroughly determined the fundamental difference between the castle doctrine and stand your ground types of criminal defenses.  Thoroughly justified the validity of each, and thoroughly provided one (1) example of each to support your response.

3. Analyze the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Next, evaluate the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Provide a rationale to support your response.
Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.

Insufficiently analyzed the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Insufficiently evaluated the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.

Partially analyzed the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Partially evaluated the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.

Satisfactorily analyzed the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Satisfactorily evaluated the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.

Thoroughly analyzed the overall role that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system. Thoroughly evaluated the general level of fairness of double jeopardy to the defense. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.

4. Specify the basic features of adversarial system. Next, support or critique the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Justify your response.
Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely specified the basic features of adversarial system. Did not submit or incompletely supported or critiqued the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response.

Insufficiently specified the basic features of adversarial system. Insufficiently supported or critiqued the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Insufficiently justified your response.

Partially specified the basic features of adversarial system. Partially supported or critiqued the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Partially justified your response.

Satisfactorily specified the basic features of adversarial system. Satisfactorily supported or critiqued the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Satisfactorily justified your response.

Thoroughly specified the basic features of adversarial system. Thoroughly supported or critiqued the value of the adversarial system within the criminal law system in the United States. Thoroughly justified your response.

5. Argue for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Provide a rationale to support your response.
Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.

Insufficiently argued for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.

Partially argued for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.

Satisfactorily argued for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.

Thoroughly argued for or against the right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.

6. 3 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

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00