Notice bibliographique
Résumé
By late August 2002, the Supreme Court had identified slightly more than half of the eighty or so cases it is likely to hear in the 2002 term. The nature of those cases was enough to ensure that there will be no letdown from last term's charged atmosphere. Among the issues slated for debate and decision after the new term opens October 7 is the constitutionality of a number of get-tough-on-crime efforts, including state three-strikes laws and sex offender registries. Equally high profile is a trio of cases with racial overtones. One case asks whether the Fair Housing Act (FHA) permits owners and officers of corporations to be held liable for violations of the antidiscrimination law even if they were unaware of the particular discriminatory acts that occurred. Another questions whether a Virginia law prohibiting the burning of a cross in public or on someone else's property violates the First Amendment. A case revisits the standard by which courts should assess the genuineness of a prosecutor's race-neutral reason for exercising a peremptory challenge to a potential juror. Three Strikes California's three-strikes law provides for a twenty-five years to life prison term for a third strike conviction. The question in the case of Lockyer v. Andrade and Ewing v. California, Nos. 01-1127 and 01-6978, is whether that law violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment when applied to a defendant whose conviction was for a relatively minor offense. Under the statute, Cal. Penal Code [section] 667(e) (West 1999), when a defendant with one prior conviction for a or felony is convicted of any felony, he or she must be sentenced to a term of imprisonment twice as long as he or she otherwise would have received. When a defendant with two prior serious or violent felonies is convicted of another felony of any sort, he or she ordinarily must receive a prison term of twenty-five years to life. The last, triggering, offense must be a felony, but it doesn't have to be serious or violent. The triggering offense in the case of Gary Albert Ewing, for example, occurred when he walked out of an El Segundo, California, shop with three golf clubs (worth $399 each) concealed in his trouser leg. In the case of Leandro Andrade, there were two triggering offenses-a and a fourth strike. Strike three occurred when Andrade was caught shoplifting $84.70 worth of videotapes (Snow White, Casper, The Fox and the Hound, The Pebble and the Penguin, and Batman Forever) from a K-Mart store in Ontario, California. The fourth happened when he was subsequently caught shoplifting $68.84 worth of videotapes (Free Willy 2, Cinderella, Santa Claus, and Little Women) from a different K-Mart store. While the golf club thefts in Ewing normally would constitute grand theft, and the two shoplifting offenses in the Andrade case would each constitute petty theft, the United States brief explains that Under California law, certain offenses may be either misdemeanors or felonies. There are two basic types of felony-misdemeanor (or wobbler) offenses. Some crimes that would otherwise be misdemeanors become wobblers because of the defendant's prior criminal record. Petty theft, a misdemeanor, becomes a felony-misdemeanor where the defendant has previously served a term of imprisonment for specified theft-related crimes. Others, such as grand theft, are felony-misdemeanors regardless of the defendant's prior record. Both types of wobblers qualify as triggering offenses under the Three-Strikes Law when they are felonies.--United States Brief at 3. Applying those rules in these cases, the court sentenced Ewing to twenty-five years to life for trying to shoplift three golf clubs. Andrade, on the other hand, was sentenced to two consecutive twenty-five year to life terms for his K-Mart misadventures and thus received a total sentence of fifty years to life. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».