Essay --

Carla Molina December 19th, 2013 Period.8 Judicial Review Research ‘ Case One: â€Å"Georgia .vs. Randolph† Summary This case is about Scott Randolph, who’s home was searched without a warrant. Due to this â€Å"corrupted† search, police ended up finding cocaine in his home. As a matter of fact both Randolph and his wife Janet Randolph were present during the search, it’s stated that Randolph’s wife gave permission to search the house. However Randolph denied to give that consistent, but police believed that the wife’s permission was all they needed. After the encounter with the drugs, Randolph was arrested for drug possession. This case was taken to trail and both the appellate court and Georgie Supreme court believed that the search of Randolph's home was unconstitutional. Key Details & Ideas Majority Opinion: Said by Justice David Souter â€Å" In the majority opinion, compared the reasonableness of such a search to a more casual interaction.† He believes that the co-occupants consent is not valid because their was the refusal of an other occupant. Beside on the Fourth Amendment it states that â€Å" a valid warrantless entry and search of a premises when the police obtain the voluntary consent of an occupant who shares, or is reasonably believed to share, common authority over the property, and no present co-tenant objects.† Dissenting Opinion Said by Justice Scalia â€Å" It is an act of responsible citi... .... Madison was applied to this decision because the actions committed were unconstitutional. According to the Supreme Court the 8th Amendment was broken because the District Court of Appeal was giving a cruel and unusual punishment to Graham. The 8th amendment claus does not allow a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in jail without a parole for a non-homicidal crime. Therefore Terrance could not fall through with this punishment. Opinion In my opinion, I actually agree with the court decision because yes although he did committed a crime, to be sentenced for life at young age is pretty harsh. I do agree that he should pay for his consequences but not to that extreme. They should honestly come up with a plan that suits his crime. Plus he has the right of the 8th Amendment, to not condone a cruel punishment if it does not suit the crime in which he committed.