hate crimes
On June 11, 1993, the United State's Supreme Court upheld Wisconsin's penalty enhancement law, which imposes harsher sentences on criminals who intentionally select the person against whom the crime is committed, because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person. Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the unanimous Court. On the evening of October 7, 1989, Mitchell and a group of young black men attacked and severely beat a lone white boy. The group had just finished watching the film "Mississippi Burning", in which a young black boy was, while praying, beaten by a white man. After the film, the group moved outside and Mitchell asked if they felt "hyped up to move on some white people". When the white boy approached Mitchell said, "You all want to screw somebody up? There goes a white boy, Go get him." The boy was left unconscious, and remained in a coma for four days. Mitchell was convicted of aggravated battery, which carries a two-year maximum sentence. The Wisconsin jury, however, found that because Mitchell selected his victim based on race, the penalty enhancement law allowed Mitchell to be sentenced to up to seven years. The jury sentenced Mitchell t
Rehnquist argues that, "The First Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment contains the "equal protection clause", which states that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". The Wisconsin law is unconstitutional, and is essentially unenforceable. Though Rehnquist argued that Wisconsin v. The Court ruled the state¹s flag desecration statute unconstitutional. o four years, twice the maximum for the crime he committed without the penalty enhancement law. Consider the following FBI guidelines to help determine whether a crime is hate-motivated (Cacas, 33): A substantial portion of the community where the crime occurred perceives that the incident was bias-motivated; The suspect was previously involved in a hate crime; and The incident coincided with a holiday relating to, or a date of particular significance to, a racial, religious, or ethnic/national origin group these guidelines certainly fail to offer any exact or definitive system with which to classify crimes as hate-motivated. This case involved a juvenile who was convicted under the St. However, even if this practice is held to be constitutional, surpassing the existing maximum penalty with an additional statute that specifically lists bigotry as an unacceptable motive, certainly qualifies as being the same as imposing an additional penalty for unpopular beliefs.
Common topics in this essay:
Supreme Court,
St Paul,
Justice Rehnquist,
Fourteenth Amendment,
Wisconsin Mitchell,
Mississippi Burning,
Court Gellman,
Justice O¹Connor,
Consider FBI,
Hell Unfortunately,
penalty enhancement,
supreme court,
st paul,
penalty enhancement law,
wisconsin mitchell,
enhancement law,
rav st paul,
fourteenth amendment,
rav st,
fighting words,
free speech,
white boy,
penalty enhancement laws,
hate-motivated cacas 33,
enhancement laws wisconsin¹s,
|
Acceptance Essays
