Recent orders
The United States versus Nixon Case
Student’s Name
Professor
Course
Date of Submission
The United States versus Nixon Case
Mixon’s case involves a declaration of possessing ammunition. Mixon was convicted of possessing the ammunition after the police officers found him having an antique which had five 9mm rounds. The government could not prosecute him because of the gun alone since it is only prohibited to carry firearms. According to the Gun Control Act, the antique firearm is not classified as a firearm and therefore, he was charged with having the 9mm rounds. Felons are not allowed to have ammunition. After a bench trial, Mixon was found guilty after he tried to dismiss the theory on the same. It was said that the local police had stopped him after suspecting that he had intentions of robbing a video store. It was at this time he was found carrying the gadget with five bullets. The government later discovered that the gun was identified to be a .38-caliber Hopkins & Allen revolver which Mixon could legally own since it was manufactured before 1899. Due to the bullets loaded inside, it was decided by the government that Mixon was guilty regardless of the gun exclusion. In this paper, the United States versus Mixon case will be discussed to a profound extent with regards to its significance in the criminal justice system and how it represents major crime judgments in the courts today
In self-defense, he dismissed the charges saying that the police did not have a proper reason as to why they stopped him and did the search. It was then when the judge decided to do an evidentiary proof, and one of the police officers who arrested him was there to testify. The officer said that he was conducting a patrol regarding suspicious personnel in the area when he stopped and searched Mixon as well as another man, and that is when he discovered the loaded gun in the pocket (Findlaw, pg 1).
After the testimony from the officer, Mixon did mention nothing, and thus the judge concluded that the two men deserved to be thoroughly searched as they had reasonable doubt and suspicion to do so. Before any other word from the district court, Mixon raised a plea agreement that could have forsaken the undecided motion. He still didn’t understand the implication of having the bullets in the antique firearm. After entering the guilty plea, Mixon decided to withdraw that plea on the point that he entered it on the mistaken belief. Judge Stadtmueller is the one who allowed Mixon to withdraw his plea and dismissed himself from the case involvement. After judge Stadtmueller walked away, judge Clevert took over.
The first thing he did was to handle the motion which was not tackled. He received more evidence on the motion he came up with. At this juncture, Moxin said he didn’t even know he was carrying a gun in his pocket and neither did he consent being searched. The government then introduced the 9mm bullets as evidence which led to Mixon to be termed as not being credible. Mixon reconsidered the suppression decision and filed a motion to let go of the alignment. Since the proceedings of the case started, Moxin for the first time said that it was not a crime to own ammunition loaded with an antique firearm. The magistrate judge then noted that the bullets were designed in a way that they could be used in other guns which could qualify to be firearms and therefore it was of no use to mention that they were loaded on an antique firearm and thus the district court dismissed the motion.
The parties proceeded with written stipulations, and they recounted that the bullets were Russian made and were loaded into a “.38 caliber Hopkins & Allen revolver.” There was nothing quoted on whether the same bullets could be used in another gun neither did the age of the antique be mentioned. Nothing was said of whether the same bullets could safely be fired from this gun (Mason, et.al pg. 31). The district court convicted Mixon, and he was given a 45months imprisonment. Mixon clearly states that a gun is not considered a “firearm” under the Gun Control Act if and only if it was manufactured before 1899. He also adds that ammunition is prohibited if it is designed for a firearm and therefore the bullets intended for the antique should not be an issue when felons possess them.
It is recorded in the statue that; “a felon may not ship or transport in the regional or foreign market, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition” (Findlaw, pg. 1). In its definition, it excludes any gun that was made in or before 1898 or which in other terms is known as the antique. It was so unfortunate that during the trial none of the parties mentioned that or even presented evidence on the same. This shows that both the government and Mixon failed. The question then is, if the government knew about it, why was it not raised during the trial?
The Gun Control Act defines ammunition as any product or rather anything that is designed to be used in a firearm. This then clearly tells us that a bullet, since it is intended to be used in a gun is ammunition (Bassiouni, pg. 9). Mixon during the trial points out that even if bullets are termed as ammunition when they are loaded in an antique or rather in a firearm designed in or before 1898, it doesn’t matter whether they can be loaded in other guns, but then they remain not to be ammunition. According to this statement then Mixon should have been termed as innocent since he claims to have had an antique. Is it right or not? No one bothered to find out the fact about it.Mixon tries to pose a compelling argument during the trial. At the very end what matters is the evidence or the proof that is provided and not the many cases without support that Mixon portrayed. Yes, he said that the gun was antique but what proof did he have to show that it was an antique statistically? The government was able to produce the 9mm bullets as proof to the court. It was also able to bring a police officer to testify against him. Again when the 9mm bullets were presented, that was still not enough evidence that the bullets were ammunition. But for a person like Mixon who was not ready to explain and fully defend that the bullets were designed for antique, it was full proof.
It is right to say that it is the design of the bullet that mattered and not necessarily the location. Bullets were in the cylinder, but again that does not describe what they are designed for. Mixon did not even establish any equivalency of measures when he moved to dismiss the motion. He didn’t show that it’s not the size of the bullet that describes what it’s designed for. One can say that the 9mm bullets are likely to be used in a 38-caliber gun that Mixon was found with. Is size the only factor affecting the designing of a bullet?
As for the trial, Mixon almost entirely neglected his defense by missing the facts necessary to establish it from the evidence. In his few attempts to dismiss the motions, he failed to provide any evidence that would show or support the fact that the bullets were designed to be used in that gun and not in any other firearm as perceived by the government. Most importantly, he did not stand firm to explain that the 38-caliber handgun was manufactured in or before 1898 or in other words was an antique firearm (US v. Mixon, 7th Cir.). He failed to give stipulated evidence which could have supported his arguments as well his attempts to dismiss the motions during the trial.
Since the government was able to provide evidence when Mixon was guilty or innocent that did not matter in the long run, therefore, as the experimental evidence reveals or shows, Mixon was caught with gun bullets. Both the gun and the bullets that he was found with he could not legally possess them as a felon. However much the trial went under legal processes, we can see there is the likelihood of innocent people getting in trouble. For instance, Mixon not being able to provide evidence in the district court places him in great difficulty. The government can give evidence in court as well as asking the police officer to testify against Mixon which he is not able to deny since he lacks substantial evidence.
If only Mixon dared to explain and probably provide evidence about the firearm having been manufactured in 1898 or before, then he could have resolved a lot of questions during the trial. The gun is an antique could have solved almost every questioning in the court basing everything on the Gun Control Act.
From the above discussion, the United States versus Mixon case is a significant elaboration and a good representation of major crime judgments in the courts today. Its therefore of importance that everyone speaks out their minds as well as is provided with the necessary personnel like lawyers who can help them and thus avoid such scenarios whereby one is judged for not being able to speak up.
Work Cited
“Findlaw’s United States Seventh Circuit Case And Opinions.”. Findlaw, 2019, https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1226354.html.
Bassiouni, M. Cherif. International extradition: United States law and practice. Oxford University Press, 2014.
Burchell, Jonathan M. Principles of criminal law. Juta and Company Ltd, 2013.
Mason, Alpheus Thomas, and Donald Grier Stephenson Jr. American constitutional law: introductory essays and selected cases. Routledge, 2017.
Pound, Roscoe. Criminal justice in America. Routledge, 2018.
US v. Mixon, 457 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2006).
The United States versus Kagawa Case
The United States versus Kagawa Case
Student’s Name
Institution
The United States versus Kagawa Case
Among the cases that significantly impacted Indian Jurisdiction in the nation was the United States versus Kagawa case. It is a fundamental Supreme Court’s rule that will remain vital and historically significant in elaborating the supremacy of the nation’s law on the Native Americans reservation. The Supreme Court ruling was not only substantial in postulating humanity but also proved that the Congress had authority over the Indian Americans matters as well as testing the application of the Major Crimes Act of 1885. Kagawa’s case involves his conviction of murdering Lyouse, who was also an Indian American on the Hoopa Valley Reservation, California. The situation was similar to the Ex Parte Crow Dog’s case, where the Crow Dog was accused of killing a Native American at the Indian lands there before in the year 1881. Both Kagawa and Crow Dog’s case involves Indian to Indian jurisdiction regarding the United States Supreme Court, and they also coincidentally occur at the Indian reservation. In the discussion below, the case of United States v. Kagawa is elaborated to a profound extent with regards to its relationship with the Ex Parte Crow Dog case as well as the Major Crimes Act.
Kagawa, an Indian American was accused of killing Lyouse who was also a Native American who resides in California. The manslaughter happened when Kagawa and his son Mahawaha stepped into the deceased house and an argument raised. Kagawa stubbed Lyouse as Mahawaha held tight Lyouse’s wife. Kagwa and his son were then taken to the court of law where they were convicted of committing murder of their fellow Native American as Lyouse’s wife stand as the witness (Stark, 2016). Initially, before the supreme court intervention, Kagawa’s case was taken to the district court where the federal state significantly faced some challenges in stating the defendant’s prosecution. The federal court faced difficulty in conducting the jurisdiction as the accused claimed that the Congress did not have a mandate over the Indian to Indian cases in their reservation. Also, it was stated that the relevant section of the Indians Appropriation Act was unconstitutional and invalid leaving the judiciary body with no right to proceed with the jurisdiction.
However, after the appeal to the Supreme Court, the case was approached with a different perspective as the supremacy considered it as a significant opportunity to put the Major Crime Act into action. It was stated that immediately after the validation of the Major Crime Act in the nation’s constitution, the federal courts were granted the mandate to deal with Indian to Indian cases if the crime has been committed in the Indian’s lands (Singh 2014). Full commission over the Indian tribes was given to the district court, and they could significantly be responsible for ensuring law adherence even in the Indian reservation. At the Supreme court, Kagawa’s representative was Joseph D. Redding while the government defendant was George A. Jenks, an assistant United States Secretary of the Interior. Jenks only put in place the request of the Supreme Court to look at the initial ruling in Crow Dog, where the court stated the rule that the Congress has the power to regulate all the all the business with Indian tribes with regards to the Indian Commerce Clause of the constitution. He politically debated that the Congress has the authority to deal with Indians and their affairs.
On the other hand, Joseph Redding who represent Kagawa during the Supreme Court proceedings stood firm with three-fold arguments. He claimed that the Congress had never prosecuted an Indian to Indian crime in the past a hundred years of the Indian policy. Redding also argued that the mentioned indictment by Jenks contained no constituent of commerce, hence it was ahead of the act of the Congress to rule over Indian to Indian cases. Lastly, Redding contended that such in-depth change in Indian policy should not be ratified in law whose heading and body were exclusively erratic with the set on of the Major Crimes Act. Furthermore, he argued that such legislation affecting the tribe’s policy and sovereignty should be debated in the public and civilians views be put in consideration. However, Redding did not mention anything related to the tribe having laws designed to deal with criminality among Indian to Indians in their lands. The Supreme court Jurors fell on the prosecution side, and Kagawa was prosecuted that marking the commencement of the Major Crime Act that had been significantly incorporated in the nation’s constitution.
The Ex Parte Crow Dog case of 1881 included Brule Lakota Sioux, well known as Crow Dog who was indicted for assassinating an administration tailored chief. Later, after Crow Dog was imprisoned and sentenced with murder, he disputed the United States did not take in for questioning any jurisdiction on the Indian lands in matters involving Indians to Indians. The Supreme Court agreed with the Crow dog’s declaration that they had no authority on the Indians issues as the misconduct committed was between two Native Americans, and it happened on the Indians reservation (Friedman, & Percival, 2017).There before no rule that was put in action regarding assuring Congress the power to deal with Indian cases in their lands. The Ex Parte Crow Dog case initiated the court’s decision that there should have conventions to be followed for the Congress to have jurisdictive power over the Indians and other tribes. Among the process to be stick to was to put in place an open law providing jurisdiction to state courts over Indian on Indian lawbreaking in their lands. It is clear that both Kagawa and Crow Dog had the aim to put up with the United States Jurisdiction as seen above as Crow Dog succeeded which was in contrast with Kagawa who faced the law action.
With regards to the Major Crime Act, both the Cow Dog and Kagawa cases are significantly affected. To a profound extent, the Major Crime Act can be mentioned as the answer to the no jurisdiction in Ex parte Crow Dog Supreme Court pronouncement. It was an outcome of the Congress views on the obligation of enlightening Indians the prominence of the decree of law. Also, the Congress stated the Indians sovereignty that any native who conducted criminal offense had to be treated unlawful and pronounce judgment on under the nation’s laws. After that, the Major Crimes Act was passed and put in the national constitution. It was significantly executed during United State versus Kagawa case as the authority adhered to the key. The Major Crime Act heightened the power of the federal government to take legal action against Indians who go against the delinquency stated anywhere in the land, the Indian reservations being included. The major crimes that were in the act included murder, rape, manslaughter, firebombing, burglary, robbery as well as attack with intent to exterminate.
The Major Crime Act put into force the conviction of the law offenders, and it significantly strengthened the American Indian sovereignty in the country. The act of defiant escaping the law supremacy just because they are Indians and have committed the misconducts against other Indians in the Indians reservation was not ethically right. For instance, considering the Crow Dogs deed of murdering a stated chief and escaping legal judgment was not fair and contrary to humanity as well as principles of jurisdiction. With such a community, people will not leave at peace as their civil rights will not be valued and they will be prone to every kind of criminality as the offenders have the assurance of to be not judged under the law of the nation. The Supreme Courts situation of having no power to sentence is an explicit elaboration of how the criminals would be escaping judgment. However, the Major Crime Act played an essential role in curbing inferior supremacy among the Indians and other native tribes in the nation (Feller 2016).
From the above discussion, the United States versus Kagawa case is a significant elaboration of the Major Crime Act being put in action. It significantly set up the way forward towards the Indians jurisdiction, and it effectively reduced the intensity of such criminality on the Indian reservations. Placing in consideration of the Crow Dog’s case, people had no sound civil rights during that error as anyone could commit murder and evade jurisdiction as the Supreme Court had no mandate on the Indian on Indian cases that had occurred in their reservations. The Major Crime Act set the pace towards the national jurisdiction as well as supremacy, and it significantly showed other nations the way forward in matters regarding citizens’ sovereignty.
References
Feller, A. P. (2016). Serve Honorably, Foreign-Born Service Member, or Risk Deportation: Determining Whether a Conviction under the UCMJ Constitutes a Deportable Crime Involving Moral Turpitude under the Immigration and Nationality Act. AFL Rev., 76, 1.
Friedman, L. M., & Percival, R. V. (2017). The roots of justice: Crime and punishment in Alameda County, California, 1870-1910. UNC Press Books.
Singh, S. (2014). Closing the Gap of Justice: Providing Protection for Native American Women Through the Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction Provision of VAWA. Colum. J. Gender & L., 28, 197.
Stark, H. K. (2016). Criminal Empire: The Making of the Savage in a Lawless Land. Theory & Event, 19(4).
Access to Care in Managed Care Program
Access to Care in Managed Care Program
Introduction
Access to quality health care is subject to a number of determinant factors that dictate the level of ease with which patients can access quality services. Based from various angles of view, internal and external factors that the health care facilities are subjected to affect the integrity of services offered. Such factors as actual practices, type of facility, density of facility distribution, nature of social forces, funding, compensation, operational costs and location impact on the delivery of health care services. In this discourse, these factors are briefly discussed, compared and contrasted in order to unravel the potency of inherent factors that healthcare faces.
The Factors
Healthcare provider office practices determine the level of success that the actual healthcare given achieves. In the paper titled Capacity Planning and Management in Hospitals, Green (16) notes that the enormity of the issues behind the pressure from cost benefit analysis presses practices to be a one sided affair. The main issues in organization of healthcare institutions include the introduction of competition in the health industry coupled to the reduction of government subsidies. Practices at the healthcare facilities are therefore not only tending towards complete commercialization but also rising cost that the author feels continually impacts in effective reduction in patient access. Without the best approach that is cognizant of modified management tools to fit in the changing health care sector, practices at the facilities will continue to face hardships in achieving appropriate delivery of healthcare.
Alternatively, the types of managed care model in which the providers are involved dictate the manner in which the delivery of healthcare services is conducted. Several models of managed care programs exist with an implication on the fact that the specialized needs of each attract a certain form of operation that would not operate in a different model setting. Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) models include closed panel, staff model, group model, open panel, Independent Practice Association (IPA), network model, and mixed model (TMCI, 2). Each of these models has inherent requirements that uniquely dictate the order of operations and access for health care by individuals. For instance, when dealing with a mental health facility, standard and village settings are differently modeled. The village type has restrictions which may effectively reduce the general access by the public in comparison with the other types of models (TVISA, 1).
Additionally, the concentration of a certain type of health facility in a given physical stretch determines the accessibility of the given service. This is because the geographical density of provider practices directly implies on how well an area is covered by the institution. As partly observed in the explanation given by location of the health facility, coverage of an area by health care centers would also be a factor of their density in an area. Apparently, factors such as the population density of an area determine the appropriate number of health care centers needed. It therefore follows that highly populated regions will require a higher number of health care centers to cater for the large number of patients.
Besides the density factors observed above, perhaps the most important social determinant of distribution of health care facilities and the delivery of health care are the members’ cultural preferences. According to a study conducted by Deogaonkar (1), socio-economic imbalance in the society resulting from multicultural diversity could occasion differential delivery of health care. According to the author, an unequal society is likely to have an unequal delivery of health care due to cultural and identity preference issues. In illustration of social problems related to cultural inequalities for instance in India, the author reckons that cultural setbacks in remote rural areas extend from mere ethnic divisions to gender disparities that exist.
Moreover, amid deliberate attempts for economic stabilization, diminished government funding provides for the cutting of public spending among various sectors which involve health care. The government comes up with health care plans to take care of the health liability of patients in the program. Where there are expectation of compensation available from the public and funding through various packages such as the government, it becomes a big problem for compensation. Funding for health care makes the population more reluctant to meet their health bills. According to AMA (1), licensing of medical institutions is done on the premise that some medical fees are not mandatory from the patients before they are treated. Existence of pre-treatment conditions such as compensation for consultations only makes it difficult for patients to undertake treatment for fear of being unable to meet the cost.
Likewise, health care providers’ costs of operation the health facility as a business seem to be increasing in a hard economic regime marred by uncertainty of the future. When the cost of operating a health care facility goes up, the cost is consequently passed on to the patient who will in return be reluctant t take up health programs. Under the provision of provider training to provide care, there is an element of extra cost since the training figures rise with extra costs. Operational costs are however more potent determinants of healthcare in relation to provision of training which is more specific and seasonal.
Furthermore, expectation of compensation for health care delivered is likely to cause marked response differences from health care providers. In a world full of commercialization in every sector, money is becoming a factor for the determination of what facilities are enjoyed and by which groups and classes. According to Cohen et al (997), it is possible to draw a clear inference that those areas with a poor economic support can have difficulties in attaining medical care. If the population cannot provide compensation for the health care services rendered, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to continue operating. In an industry where operation is controlled by the market system, it is difficult to facilitate the healthcare delivery without a certain element of compensation from the patients.
In addition, issues surrounding access to care by the population that extend to logistics of the facility also determine the delivery of healthcare. According to Daskin and Dean (44), the location of health facilities is strategically considered in the planning stages of the health program. Besides covering the population in as close as possible proximity, it certainly needs a consideration of the condition and maintenance of the facility. Similar sentiments are held by Calvo and Marks (408) in their work where they observe that effective location of the healthcare should be a factor of several factors one of which is a mathematical optimization design.
By comparing all these factors, one common feature is persistent; healthcare is likely to be compromised due to the risks involved. Alternatively, there are several perspectives from which a factor is analyzed from, which gives differential impact; which ultimately affects the status of delivery of health care. It is correct to state that despite the differences in the origin of the factors from both internal and external sources, health care is affected by all factors to varied degrees.
In contrast, while coverage and distribution related factors seem to auger well with economic and funding related factors, social factors seem to have a different impact. Development and planning related factors seem to be both internal and external while social factors appear to emanate from forces beyond the control of the management or donors. In light of this difference, it seems that the healthcare is a factor of both natural and artificial forces that modern healthcare management ought to handle cautiously well.
Works Cited
“Physician Licensure: An Update of Trends,” American Medial Association (AMA), 2011. Web. HYPERLINK “http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/young-physicians-section/advocacy-resources/physician-licensure-an-update-trends.page” http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/young-physicians-section/advocacy-resources/physician-licensure-an-update-trends.page (accessed 11 April 2011)
Calvo, Alberto B. & Marks, David H. “Location of Health Care Facilities: An Analytical Approach,” Socio-Economic Planning Studies. 7.5(1973):407-422
Cohen, R. D., Kaplan, G., Lynch J. W., & Pamuk, E., “Inequality in Income and Mortality in the United States: Analysis of Mortality and Potential Pathways,” BMJ, 312(1996):996-1103.
Daskin, Mark S. & Dean, Latoya K. “Location of Health Care Facilities,” International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. 70.2(2005):43-76
Deogaonkar, Milind “Socio-Economic Inequality and its Effect on Healthcare Delivery in India: Inequality and Healthcare,” Electronic Journal of Sociology, (2004). Web. HYPERLINK “http://www.sociology.org/content/vol8.1/deogaonkar.html” http://www.sociology.org/content/vol8.1/deogaonkar.html (accessed 11 April 2011)
Green, Linda V. “Capacity Planning and Management in Hospitals,” International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. 70.1(2005):15-41
The Village Integrated Service Agency (TVISA), Comparison of Managed Care Models,” n.d. Web. HYPERLINK “http://www.village-isa.org/Overview/comparison.htm” http://www.village-isa.org/Overview/comparison.htm (accessed 11 April 2011)
Tufts Managed Care Institute (TMCI), “Managed Care Models and Products,” 1998. Web. HYPERLINK “http://www.thci.org/downloads/ModelsProducts.pdf” www.thci.org/downloads/ModelsProducts.pdf (accessed 11 April 2011)