Must equal up to 1200 words must have intext citation "      " if needed  and reference must be included 

1. What is the primary duty of the executive branch of government in criminal law?

2. In 1973 the United States Supreme Court handed down the famous case Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), wherein the Court determined that the  decision to have an abortion is a private decision that is protected from government intervention, in some  circumstances, by the U.S. Constitution.  Suppose that a state legislature passes legislation (a state statute) that attempts to reverse the Roe decision by prohibiting all abortions in that state. Which is controlling in that state, the statute or the decision of the United States Supreme Court? Explain your answer.

3.Define the term “court of record.”

4.Define jurisdiction, and differentiate between a court of general jurisdiction and a court of limited jurisdiction.

5. What is the common law? How do the concepts of stare decisis and precedent relate to the common law?

 6. What is the source of most criminal law today? Where does that law come from?

7. What is the constitutional mission of a prosecutor?

8. Create a set of facts under which co-defendants could not be represented by the same attorney. Explain why separate counsel is necessary under your scenario.

9. Do you believe that police officers should arrest every violator they encounter, discover, or are made aware of? Support your answer. What factors should an officer consider when deciding whether to arrest or otherwise pursue a prosecution?

Reply 75 words to Greg listed below

This is indeed a very difficult question to ask and it is also a question that will continue to be debated for quite some time. TCA 39-13-107 reads, “...included a human embryo or fetus at any stage of gestation...” (Hall, 2015). As the law is written in 2011, I do agree that any person who knowingly harms a pregnant mother or her unborn child at any state of utero, should be charged with two counts of assault and/or murder whichever way the situation dictates. TCA simply states that a viable fetus is established at any stage of gestation, therefore, a person who would commit an act on a pregnant female, who did not know at the time of the act that the woman was in fact with child, is just as guilty as committing an act to a woman who is eight months along in term.

This TCA can include women who choose to do narcotics or present other similar circumstances that would result in a child being killed as a result of the mother's poor decision making. In my personal experiences, the decision to charge or what type of charge to present rests with the district attorney and totality of the circumstances. There are cases where leniency would need to be applied. For example, a car accident to where the mother/driver would be involved. In this simple example, the situation was an accident, therefore, the mother/driver should not be charged unless the mother/driver is found to be at fault for the accident by means of carelessness. Numerous other situations and/or circumstances have been deliberated over the past years, to include whether or not a woman can be charged for narcotic use while pregnant (Liss-Schultz, 2017). The discussion regarding narcotic use while pregnant failed in 2016, but could in many circumstances to be revisited in the future.

In the case mention within the tutorial, the male subject had knowledge that the female subject was pregnant and took assaultive action to terminate the pregnancy (Hall, 2015). To state that abortion can only be done under certain circumstances is as general of a statement as the TCA in this case. The decision of Roe v. Wade in 1973, established a very distinctive summary as to where the Supreme Court rests on the decision of a woman's right to her body as it pertains to the 14th Amendment (The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2017). It is my opinion, that the TCA discussed does not go outside the bounds of the Roe v. Wade decision and that the State did not narrow the opinion given by the Court.

References

Hall, D. (2015). Criminal law and procedure (7th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. (2017, December 22). Roe v. Wade. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade

Liss-Schultz, N. (2017, June 23). Tennessee's war on women is sending new mothers to jail. Retrieved from https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/tennessee-drug-use-pregnancy-fetal-assault-murder-jail-prison-prosecution/

Reply to Josh listed below

This is a difficult question. I agree that any person who harms a unborn child while harming a pregnant woman, should be able to be charged with two counts of assault. If a person sees a woman who is pregnant, they know there is a fetus growing inside of her and she will eventually give birth to a human being. Since this is common knowledge, anyone who harms this woman knowingly harms the fetus. By this thinking, harming a pregnant woman is the same as harming a mother and her infant baby. If a person does harm a mother and child, they would ultimately be charged with at least two counts of assault. The only part about this statute I disagree with is that it does not apply to any act or omission performed by the pregnant woman (Guenther, 2014). I understand the "my body my choice" statement, but if the court is able to charge an individual with assault or worst for harming a fetus by harming the woman, then why can a woman who knows she is pregnant, not be charged for knowingly harming the fetus. It is one thing to say the woman was in a car wreck and she did not wear a seatbelt and as a result of this the fetus died. While she did make the decision to not wear the seatbelt, she did not know she was going to get in a car wreck. Where I am coming from is, if a woman who knows she is pregnant, decides to smoke, drink, or use any drug that could cause harm does so, then she should be able to be prosecuted for knowingly harming the fetus. The reason for this is she knew she was pregnant, she knew from common knowledge that this action could potentially cause harm to the fetus, and she still followed through with the action.

While it is not right, it is understandable how the petitioner could not be charged for killing the fetus. Since the due process clause requires a person to have warning or notice that his actions could result in punishment, he could not be charged (Hall, 2015). While I understand this process, one would think since the petitioner told Keeler he would “stomp the baby out of her” this would be an admission that he knew what he was doing was wrong. Therefore he should have been charged, but since there was not a law in California regarding assault charges for harming a fetus, there was not anything to charge him with.

References

Hall, D. (2015). Criminal law and procedure (7th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Guenther, L. N. (2014). SB 1391 and the criminalization of pregnancy in tennessee. Retrieved March 6, 2018, from http://www.newappsblog.com/2014/04/sb-1391-and-the-criminalization-of-pregnancy-in-tennessee.html