Answer 1: I find that the ruling of the court correct in Motion a & b as to each

Question

Answer 1:

I find that the ruling of the court correct in Motion a & b as to each of Dobson’s motions. Whereas, In denying motion c court has mistaken.

Explanation:

Motion a.: to suppress the line-up identification: According to the due process clause of 14Th Amendment, there is a likelihood of line-up being unnecessarily and can cause misidentification. However, Dobson have no right to counsel against line-up. Therefore, court’s is correct in granting motion a.

Motion b.: to suppress the in-court identification: As Benet has recognized Dobson in the line up on the night of crime. He can can recognize him independently. Therefore, his in-court identifican has a meaning. Therefore, court is correct in denying this motion b.

Motion c.: to suppress Dobson's confession: When first asked Dobson had claimed his right to counsel, and now he could not waive it without presence of his counsel. Therefore, I find that by denying this motion court had made a mistake.

Answer 2:

Self defense comes under affirmative defense. Although Vance has tried to attack Dobson many times, he also stabbed knife in his arms. However, when Dobson shot Vance, Dobson was is his car and Vance, was getting up from the ground. Dobson could have chosen to escape the scene without killing Vance. As this was latent attack, Dobson has no right to claim for self defence, when he had way to safely escape.

Explanation / Answer

One night, Dobson and Vance were in a local bar. Vance threatened and taunted Dobson, and a fight ensued. Brent, the bartender, ejected Vance from the bar. Later that evening when Dobson left the bar, Vance approached him in the parking lot brandishing a knife. The two men fought, and Dobson was stabbed in the arm. Dobson knocked Vance to the ground and ran to his car which was parked 50 feet away. Dobson grabbed a loaded pistol from the glove compartment of his car and returned to where Vance was just getting up off the ground. Vance, still holding the knife, lunged at Dobson. Dobson shot Vance, killing him. Dobson ran back to his car and drove away. Brent, who was watching from inside the bar and had a clear view of the entire incident, called the police.

Oakes, the investigating officer, arrived at the bar and questioned Brent. Brent told Oakes what he had observed earlier that evening in the bar and in the parking lot. He provided a description of Dobson and of the car and also provided a license plate number. He described Dobson to Oakes as a white man of about 35 years of age, short with a slight build, closely cropped hair and a short, neatly trimmed beard. Brent told Oakes that, although the person he described was a regular patron of the bar and Brent recognized him as such, he did not know his name.

Oakes determined that the car Brent described was registered to Dobson. Oakes then went to Dobson’s home to question him about the events. Dobson voluntarily spoke to Oakes, but denied being in the bar that evening and denied any involvement in the shooting. He further denied that he knew Vance.

Oakes asked Dobson to accompany him to the police station and to participate in a lineup, "to clear things up." Dobson voluntarily agreed and was taken to the police station where he was placed in a lineup. There were four other men in the lineup of the same race, and of the same general age, height and build as Dobson. All of the men had similar facial characteristics and hair styles, except Dobson had a beard and none of the other participants in the lineup had any significant facial hair. Brent picked Dobson out of the lineup and identified him as the man he had seen fighting with Vance in the bar and in the parking lot, and whom he had seen shoot Vance.
After the lineup, Dobson was taken to an interrogation room by Oakes, and Oakes read Dobson his Miranda rights. Dobson said that he wanted to speak to a lawyer and would have to retain one, as he did not have a lawyer. Dobson was then taken to a jail cell. Two hours later, Dobson called for Oakes and said that he changed his mind and that he was willing to talk to him without a lawyer. Oakes again read Dobson his Miranda rights, and Dobson then signed a written waiver of his rights. Oakes then interrogated Dobson, who confessed that he shot Vance. Dobson was then arrested and charged with murder and unlawful possession of a loaded weapon.

Dobson was arraigned on the charges, and an attorney was retained to represent him. After Dobson was indicted, his attorney moved (a) to suppress the lineup identification on the ground that the lineup was improperly conducted.

Dobson’s attorney further moved (b) to suppress any in-court identification by Brent on the ground that the improper lineup tainted any subsequent identification.

Finally, Dobson’s attorney moved (c) to suppress Dobson’s confession on the ground that it was taken in violation of his right to counsel.

At the suppression hearing, Brent testified to his prior familiarity with Dobson and to his opportunity to observe him over an extended period of time on the night of the shooting, both in the bar and in the parking lot. Oakes testified to the circumstances surrounding the lineup and Dobson’s confession.
The court granted the motion (a) to suppress the line-up identification, but denied the motions (b) to suppress the in-court identification and (c) to suppress Dobson's confession.

At trial, Brent testified to the events he observed on the night of the shooting. Dobson took the stand and testified that, on several occasions prior to the night of the shooting, Vance had approached Dobson and threatened to kill him. He further testified that, twice before, Vance assaulted Dobson, but, although Vance was a larger and stronger man, Dobson was able to escape from Vance’s attack. Dobson admitted that he shot Vance, but claimed that he did so in self-defense because Vance had already stabbed him and was again threatening him with a knife.

QUESTIONS
Was the ruling of the court correct as to each of Dobson’s motions?
Analyze the legal issues relating to Dobson's claim of self-defense.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.