Description
Assignment #2:
• In your own words, write a case brief of the Supreme Court's decision in Safford v. Redding (2009). You can find the entirety of the opinion at the following link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZO.h...
• You do not need to read or discuss any concurring or dissenting opinions in your brief, just brief the majority opinion.
• Use 12-point, Times New Roman font, single-spaced.
• Include a heading at the top of your paper. In your heading, remember to indicate: your name / the class, the course CRN #, and the instructor / the assignment # / and the date. For example, a proper heading would look like this:
Jimmy Jones
Criminal Law CRN# 20067, Prof. Carvill
Assignment #2
3/9/18
• Failure to include a proper heading will result in a 10% grade reduction (-10 points).
• You must follow the case brief format. Minimally, your case brief should include the following sections and they should be clearly labeled:
Case Name & Citation:
Court Issuing the Opinion:
Procedural History:
Facts:
Issue:
Holding:
Reasoning/Rationale:
• Single-spaced, your brief should be no more than one full page in length. It should not be less than half a page in length.
• Write in complete sentences and use proper grammar. Widespread grammatical errors will hinder your clarity and your grade.
• Assignment #2 must be submitted to this Blackboard dropbox by end of day on 10/10/2018.
• Your submissions will all be checked by the Safe Assign plagiarism detection software. DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Write in your own words to the extent possible. A Safe Assign match report of 60% or higher will be potential grounds for a grade reduction.
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Student Name
Class
Course
Instructor
Assignment
Date
Case Name & Citation:
Safford v. Redding (2009)
Citation: 557 U.S. 364 129 S. Ct. 2633; 174 L. Ed. 2d 354; 77 U.S.L.W. 4591; 245 Ed. Law Rep.
626; 09 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7974; 2009 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9383; 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S
1011
Court Issuing the Opinion:
United States Supreme Court
Procedural History:
The school officials requested for summary judgment on basis that the respondent’s Fourth
Amendment protection was not violated. The Arizona District Court granted def...