The case of United States v Armstrong

The case of United States v Armstrong

The case of United States v Armstrong teaches us that to file a claim on the prosecution, and the defendant must prove that the authorities in the same order lacked to prosecute a similar suspect of another race. The second case of United States v Williams teaches us that if the defendant is seeking to overturn an indictment, he must be able to disclose exculpatory evidence to prove the prosecutorial misconduct. In the third case of United States v Marion, we learn that excessive delay of an indictment may distort the ability of the defendant to present an effective defense, hence speedy trial must prevail. In the fourth case of Brandy v United stated, we learn that different circumstances must be analyzed to ascertain whether the plea made knowingly, voluntarily, or in an intelligent manner.

The four cases collectively relate consistently to prosecution. This is because the first case talks about judgment behind every trial and the reasonings in every claim by referring to previous proceedings. The second case analyses indictment, whereby the defendant must provide evidence in order to prove misconduct. The third case analyzes the issue of speedy trial, whereby there should be no delay between the period of filling the case and trail. The fourth case elaborates on plea-bargaining of a case where circumstances of intended appeal must be examined to determine the intentions.

The first case relates to due process by ensuring that the defendant’s rights of equality and fairness are not violated during prosecution. The second case also provides that the evidence exists and is valid in order to ensure the defendant is not accused falsely. The third case on speedy trial prevents the defendant from being held in custody for a long time and ends up being proven innocent. The fourth case on the issue of plea-bargaining speeds up the justice system processes, and if the case is reexamined, the charges may be reduced.