CASE BRIEF U.S v. CLEMONS Parties

CASE BRIEF U.S v. CLEMONS Parties

United States (plaintiff) v. Eugene Clemons and Germond Smith (Defendant)

Facts.

George Douglas Althouse, who was a special agent of the United States and an employee of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), had been allocated anoffice in Birmingham, Alabama. On May 28, 1992, Douglas Althouse and Sherriff Naylor Braswell, who they shared the office space, stopped at a refill station to inquire about contact details of pizza delivery services. They were heading to meet another agent whom they had planned to discuss some search warrants prepared to be conducted on the next day. While the sheriff proceeded to make the inquiry, Althouse was left in the vehicle when a gentleman in the driver’s position turned to him, pointing a gun on the Agent. There were several shots on the Agent who managed to step out of the car but later succumbed to death due to bullet wounds. The suspect drove off in a Z-28 Camaro as soon as Althouse stepped out of the vehicle.

Prior procedurals.

The Defendant had a history of carjacking cases that he had not been convicted for. Eugene Clemons did not defend himself against any of theprevious actions before the killing of Althouse.

Question of law:

Can the prior criminal cases be used as evidence of the trial while the Defendant was not convictedpreviously for the same? Clemons, in his defense, stated that Agent Althouse never identified himself rightly as a federal agent or presented any document evidencing that the Agent was a law enforcer.

Objective or Arguments of the Parties:

Eugene Clemons testified that he was not previously convicted for any cases about the carjacking, and the evidence should not be used in the trial. On mentioning the previous crimes, the Court believes that the information should be used as a piece of evidence in the case. Mr. Clemons stated that failure of Agent Although to make proper introductions meant that he was operating out of the limits of his duties. The Court declined Mr. Clemons’s claims..

Holding:

The Court testified that theproofwas enough, and there was information that would allow the jury to prove that Mr. Clemons’s actions were illegal. The jurors were advised by the Court to put into consideration the prior evidence to the crime’s primary purpose.

Rationale:

The Court’s decision to favor the state based on the evidence presented on Mr. Clemons’s previous actions and also putting into consideration previous similar cases was further proof that the Court’s prosecutions were fair and just.

Relation of the case to the core value of integrity.

This case has some relation to the value of integrity. The Juror’s ruling to put into reference a similar case while handlingEugene Clemons’s case proves some degree of fairness in prosecution. To make sure that the prior behavior was similar to the crime committed.

Conclusion:

The Supreme court favored the Court of appeal in that their judgment was just and fair. These confirmed that the death penalty was upheld.

Reference.

*U.S. v. Clemons (United States District Court, Eleventh Circuit, September 22, 1994

Westlaw, St. Leo University, Dist. File)

U.S. v. Clemons, 843 F.2d 741 (3d Cir. 1988)