Appropriate Court Ordered Brief Case Study On A

Instructions (also attached): The paper must be submitted as a one-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12‐point Times New Roman font, one‐inch margins, and at least three sources cited in APA format.

Case: Jack and Diane are each 13 years old and are best friends. On September 12, 2012, Jack asked Diane to meet him at Moe’s Convenience Store. While in the store,

Jack steals three packs of gum and a candy bar. Jack hands Diane two boxes of candy to place in her purse. Diane places the candy in her purse. The store owner,

Moe, notices Diane place items in her purse. As Jack and Diane exit the store, Moe calls their names and runs after them. Jack pushes Moe to the ground and exits with Diane.

Moe calls the police and reports the theft. The police apprehend Jack and Diane a few blocks away from the store. The police only retrieve the boxes of candy from Diane but not the packs of gum or the candy bar taken by Jack. The police escort Jack and Diane to the police station where they question them for two hours regarding the theft. Diane confesses her and Jack’s role in the theft. Jack denies any wrongdoing. The police charge Jack and Diane with theft and also charge Jack with simple assault. Their hearings are within the state‐mandated time after they are petitioned to appear in the local juvenile court.

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

III. Diane’s Case

a) Were Diane’s due process and constitutional rights violated during the investigation process? Explain your arguments.

b) Were Diane’s due process and constitutional rights violated during the hearing process? Explain your arguments.

c) If you were the defense attorney, what arguments would you make in defense of Diane? Defend your response.

d) If you were the prosecutor, what arguments would you make in prosecution of Diane? Defend your response.

e) Would Diane’s case have been handled differently in the federal system? How would the process be different?

f) What would be an appropriate court‐ordered option available based on the fact pattern from the defense attorney and prosecutorial perspectives?