Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
In Dixon v. the United States, the petitioner, Keshia Dixon, purchases guns at two gun shows while falsely claiming that she is not under arrest for a felony. Dixon has been arrested and charged with receiving weapons and making false claims about the procurement of firearms. Finally, she admits to the allegations that the purchase of weapons took place under undercharges, but Dixon says the action is under compulsion. If she does not act, her boyfriend threatens to kill her and her daughter. Dixon claims that if the defense provides evidence that its actions are due to coercion, it must consider refuting the burden to determine the extent of the defendant’s guilt in the proceedings.
The tribunals and the government’s judgment, which refers to coercion as a defense of need in Bailey v. the US, may have conducted excuses that would otherwise be punishable. However, the presence of coercion under normal circumstances does not contradict the elements of the offense. About the criteria, Judge Stevens wrote to Congress accusing him of making a decision difficult due to his lack of guidance. There is a lack of evidence as to how this issue should be addressed (Anenson, 2017). There are no recommendations to show that the crimes in question may be incompatible with coercion protection. If Congress “might have contemplated,” that security of coercion is present for statutory crimes on offer, then there is a need to determine the Shield (Southeast Texas CJ, 2016).
Generally, the Court of Justice violated the 14th act of the United States Constitution. The July 1868 amendment states, “all people naturalized or born in the United States” (including the previously released slaves) (Anenson, 2017). The law limits the State to denying equal protection law to an individual within its competence. The position of the country is directly mentioned. The amendment has significantly extended equal rights to all American citizens and is cited in more disputes than any other amendment.
References
Anenson, T. L. (2017). Statutory interpretation, judicial discretion, and equitable defenses. U. Pitt. L. Revised Edition., 79, 1.
Southeast Texas CJ. (2016). Types of statutory defenses [Video]. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.