Case Analysis Aegis Analytical Corporation’s Strategic...

Assessment: Aegis Analytical was a start-up, manufacturing process software provider, developing solutions for the pharmaceutical industry. The company was founded on managerial know-how, established by two co-founders with in-depth knowledge of the manufacturing domain and software know-how, developed their flagship product called Discoverant. Discoverant was a revolutionary product that offered a solution to highly complex problems in the manufacturing process of pharmaceutical companies. The software had the following features: it collected data during the production process, tracked failures and then analyzed the data to give sophisticated bases for solutions to managers. Aegis aspired to be the recognized leader in the process†¦show more content†¦Value: The resources of Aegis enable it to exploit an external opportunity by developing an innovative product like Discoverant. The product offered data analysis within a few minutes, rather than the typical two-four weeks. Discoverant was one-of-a-kind product, which provided Aegis with rarity as a source of competitive advantage. The product was user-friendly and didn’t require programming expertise to be used. Discoverant was a highly innovative technology which would change the way data is collected, analyzed, and turned into reports. Discoverant did not require the process data to be in single database. It provided connectivity links between disparate data sources and reports. Imitability: The development of Discoverant required substantial financial investments: an initial start-up investment of $1.3 million, followed by $4.5 million, and $14.5 for completing their product. This was a barrier to entry, which makes the development of this product difficult to imitate. Competitors: Aegis Analytical developed a product – Discoverant - that had no direct competitors. Efforts in this direction by competitors resulted in partial solutions like Mathsoft, MatLab, SAS, and others which offered analysis of already collected data, but not collection and streamline of the actual data. To gain visibility and access to target customers, Aegis considered StrategicShow MoreRelatedProject Report on Fdi in India12690 Words   |  51 PagesREPORT ON â€Å"Analytical Study Of Foreign Direct Investment in India† Project Report Submitted towards Partial fulfillment of requirements for obtaining the degree of Master of Business Administration Session 2009-10 SUBMITTED BY Deepak kumar Gautam 0826370012 V.S.B SUBMITTED TO: Miss GarimaChaudhary Faculty Guide VIDYA SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MEERUT 1 CERTIFICATE This is to certify that Deepak Kumar Gautam student of M.B.A IV SEM V.S.B. Meerut has under gone a research project on â€Å"Analytical Study Of

Civil Rights and Equality Free Essays

African American Civil right and Equality Tara Faircloth HIS 204 Mr. Galano October 28, 2011 The topic I have chosen to write about is how African Americans worked to end segregation, discrimination, and isolation to obtain equality and civil rights. Ever since the African Americans were slaves they have had to come a long way to get where they are today. We will write a custom essay sample on Civil Rights and Equality or any similar topic only for you Order Now Some have even held positions in political offices, managed corporations, and gained all the rights that everyone else has. But, it’s never always been that way. African Americans were treated unjustly and had to go through things that most people cannot understand and have never had to endure. Over the generations African Americans have had to deal with many different struggles. Some of these struggles were unnecessary. Such as, them having to be a witness to their parents death, men would be witness to the rape of their mothers or wives, children being murdered or beaten. Back in those days the African Americans had no voice or rights. When they first came to the United States, African Americans were sold into slavery, which meant them or family members were auctioned to the slave owners. On top of this and other struggles, African Americans had to bare unmentionable punishments. They were sprayed with high power water hoses, beaten with sticks and wipes, arrested for no apparent reason, and even murdered. Between the 1950’s and 1970’s many people took part in actions to end the segregation, discrimination, and isolation among the African Americans. Some of these people included, Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. who took part in nonviolent actions, which involved sit-ins, boycotts, marches and other peaceful types of protests. For example, On December 1, 1955 Rosa Parks who was also known as the â€Å"Mother of the Civil Rights Movement† who refused to give up her seat to a white passenger. Because she was disobedient by law she was arrested, tried, and convicted for misconduct. After Rosa Parks made her stand, word spread within the African American communities. Fifty African American leaders put together the Montgomery Bus Boycott, which demanded more humane transportation system. The boycott lasted 381 days before the local ordinance segregating African Americans and whites on public buses was abolished. In 1965, a federal court forced the buses to become desegregated. Martin Luther King Jr. was an American activist, clergyman, as well as a leader in the African American Civil Rights Movement. He is to this day still known as an iconic figure for the advancement of civil rights within the United States and in other parts of the world, as well as for using nonviolent methods that he learned from Gandhi’s teachings. Martin Luther King Jr. s made to be a heroic leader in the history of modern American liberalism. When King started the civil rights movement he was a pastor at a Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama, for just over a year when the civil rights advocate contested racial segregation on city buses. The activists followed King and formed the Montgomery Improvement Association which boycotted the transit system. Finally, since the African America ns were ready to do something to support their rights they followed Kings Advice to â€Å"work with grim and firm determination to gain justice on the buses in the city†. He was respected and it was thought that his family connections and professional standing would enable him to find other pastorates, if the boycott was to fail. On April 4, 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. was shot standing outside on the balcony of his second story hotel room. The bullet went through his check smashing his jaw, and then went through his spinal cord just before it lodged inside his shoulder. Martin Luther King Jr. was pronounced dead later that night. African Americans began participating in boycotts, marches, and sit-ins to get legislation passed to overcome their degrading issues. Some cases of these are, they boycotted when Rosa Parks was arrested, during sit-ins they would sit where the white people section was. By doing any of these actions it created more issues for them such as being beaten by white men and women including the police. Although, the African Americans were just trying to stand up for what they believed in the white people did not agree. The white people had very different views on what they believed were supposed to be the way of things. While the civil rights movement took on two different paths which were the non-violent actions by Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. there were also violent acts that were the strategies of Malcolm X who went by a strict principle of violence to get even with the whites that committed crimes against the African Americans. Malcolm X was born May 19, 1925 in Omaha, Nebraska. He was the son of a Baptist minister, who was an admirer of Marcus Garvey. Garvey was the African American Nationalist leader back in the 1920’s the advocated the â€Å"back-to-Africa† movement. Malcolm’s family had to move around a lot because they were harassed by the Ku Klux Klan. For example, their home in Michigan was set on fire by the Ku Klux Klan which resulted in his father’s death. At the age of fifteen Malcolm began a criminal life of gambling, selling drugs, burglary, and hustling. In 1946, Malcolm was given ten years in prison for burglary at this time is when he began to transform his life. He transformed his life by studying the teachings of Muhammad and practicing this religion faithfully. After he expanded his vocabulary he began to understand the racial teachings of his new found religion; which believed the white man was evil, and they were doomed by Allah and that the best things for the black man to do was to separate himself from Western, white civilization-culturally, politically, physically, and psychologically. In conclusion, the African Americans had to endure a lot of pain and humiliation before they could have their own rights. If it wasn’t for everyone that took part in the civil rights movement African Americans probably never would have received recognition and being treated the same as the white man. How to cite Civil Rights and Equality, Papers

Determining Audit Materiality In The Industry - Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss about the Determining Audit Materiality In The Industry. Answer: Introduction The Australian Auditing Standards Board is a self-governing legislative board of the Australian Government which was formulated under section 227A of the Australian Securities and Investment Commission Act, 2001 .Section 336 of the Corporations Act, 2001 allows the AUASB to formulate the Auditing Standards with the aim of administering the Australian corporations. The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) directs the AUASB to evaluate the auditing guidelines which aim at serving the common public interest. These auditing standards are in confirmation with the International Standards on Auditing. There are new guidelines introduced by the Australian Auditing Standards Board with the aim to minimize the frauds and financial emergencies occurring worldwide. Some of them are ASA 315, ASA 570 and ASA 701.ASA 315 is related to the responsibility of the auditors to identify and assess the risk of quantifiable misuse in the financial report by following the business and its characteristics, conc erning its internal management .ASA 570 was formulated with the aim to conduct the audit of financial statements relating to an entity with the supposition that it is a going concern .It also involves the administrations evaluation of its capability to perpetuate as a going concern. ASA 701 is implemented with the aim of clarifying about the audit which was conducted with regards to the organization. It deals with the issues concerning the responsibility of the auditors to report the crucial information in the audit records. In this report, the conclusions drawn from the auditing of Woolworths Limited, by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, a professional consultancy services firm, shall be presented (Government of South Australia. Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, 2014). Introduction of the Company Woolworths Limited, which is one of the Top 100 listed companies on ASX, was founded on 22 September, 1924. Its headquarters are situated at Bella Vista, New South Wales, Australia. It is one of the chief Australian companies in the retail business .It is the second biggest company in Australia in terms of revenue ,which was AS$ 59 Billion in 2016.It has employed around 2,05,000 employees who attend approximately 29 million consumers .It operates in a wide variety of conglomerate business such as Woolworths supermarkets ,Woolworths Rewards ,Countdown, Carltex ,Woolworths money, Big W and ALH Group (Woolworths Group Limited ,2018).It is the biggest pack and carry wine merchant and provider of hospitality services in the country. Its audit was conducted by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu LLC, one of the members of the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL), a UK based Private company, which is limited by guarantee. It is one of the foremost proficient consultancy services firms in the areas of auditing, consulting, IPO support services, risk management and monetary consultancy services (Deloitte, 2018). On June25, 2017, it conducted the audit of the business documents of Woolworths Limited (the Company) and its subsidiaries (the Group).It included the combined documents of its subsidiaries. The auditors were independent of the group according to the regulations of the Corporations Act, 2001 and the Accounting Professional and Ethical Standards Boards APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (the Code). The Auditors examined various key points such as Profit and Loss comparison for the year 2015-2016, evaluation of financial risks including market risk, liquidity risk and credit risk. Also, the sale of H ome improvement assets including Ezi Buy and the transformation of Big W were the important decisions made by the company. Evaluation of the risk associated with Substantial Mismanagement According to Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (2013), Auditing Standard ASA 315 is concerned with the auditors accountability to recognize and evaluate the risks of significant mismanagement in the financial reports of the organization, through analyzing its internal environment and control. The matters which attracted the attention of auditors during the last financial year were: Withdrawn operations: As the management has declared the exit from the Home Improvement Business and the sale of Ezi Buy, it has entered to exercise its call option of 33.30 % shares of Hydrox pursuant to the sale of Lowes shares. Also those resources which are at onerous lease and their expenses are estimated at the least unavoidable costs. It is prone to material mismanagement in the carrying cost of the left properties and financial obligations, held at the balance date. Market risks: As the company is operating in the foreign currency transactions, so the market risks may impact on its foreign currency dealings. The foreign currency exposures due to the translation of net investments in foreign subsidiaries are not hedged, so it may influence the data in the financial statements of the company. The firm is facing the risk of material misstatements as the management can manipulate the figures of the foreign currency transactions in the financial reports (Vls?noiua Buzenche (Matei), 2014). Liquidity risks: The possibility that the firm would not be able to repay its debts on time is termed as liquidity risk. It occurs due to reduction of sales and failure to liquidate the cash and its equivalents. So, there is a risk of material misstatements pertaining to managerial personnel manipulating the figures of maturing debts and reserves maintained for fulfilling the financial obligations in the balance sheet. Credit risk: The risk of the counterparty failure to fulfill its financial obligations is termed as credit risk. So, the short term funds or derivative financial instruments which are invested with approved banks and financial instruments can be manipulated in the financial statements (Kristensen, 2015). The profit for 2015 amounted to US$ 2137.4 Million while it incurred losses in 2016 amounting to US$2347.9 Million due to loss from discontinued business activities, resulting in the net loss of US$210.5 Million. The stock in the Financial Year 2015 was US$ 4872.2 Million while in 2016 it was US$ 4558.5 Million. So it decreased by US$313.7 Million during the year. The property, plant and machinery in the Financial Year 2015 was US$ 10,062.1 Million and in the Financial Year 2016 it was US$ 8,262.8 Million ,so it decreased to US$ 3 Million during the year. So, if this trend continues, there can be a huge loss to the company in future (Woolworths Limited, 2015). The equity in the Financial Year 2015 was US$ 11,132 Million while in the Financial Year 2016, it was US$ 8,781.9 Million. The decrease was US$ 2350.1 Million (Woolworths Group, 2016). As it is estimated that the current share price of Woolworths Group Ltd is 26.95 AU$ and it is expected to increase @ 10.91 % in one year, which is a positive sign for the Company (Financial Times, 2016). But with regards to its gross margin, it is only 7%, which shows its slow growth. As the margin is decreasing, the net earnings are predicted to be low. Also there is an expected loss of $1 Billion in sales because of the competition. So, these matters are required to be recognized and evaluated on the parameters of risk identification as per the ASA315. Auditors Evaluation regarding the areas associated with the risk of substantial mismanagement. One of the areas which require the auditors opinion is the withdrawn operations by the group and the sale of Ezi Buy. In relation to this, the auditors evaluated the accuracy of the deal of Home timber and Hardware and assessed the assumptions of the managerial evaluation of the resources and financial obligations and matters relating there to. They considered accounting for the Lowes put option and the calculations of the total carrying value of the properties reflected in the financial statements of the Share Contract. Also, the taxation inferences and the conclusions of the calculations relating to the exit contracts were evaluated by them. Carrying cost of land of BIG W and Ezi Buy, its plant and machinery: The evaluation was a blend of the outward market analysis and internal value in use (VIU) analysis. The outward market analysis is executed every three years. Also, the mathematical appropriateness of the cash flow models in accordance with permitted budget and predictions were also assessed. They performed sensitivity analysis with regards to the important estimates, keeping in mind the growth rates and the rebates used in the depreciation methods. In case of liquidity risks, the firm retains a reserve of the minimum of US$ 500 Million with tenure of 12 months. In order to lessen the refinance and re price risk, an amount is locked for the period of 12 months. (Khorwatt, 2015). In the case of credit risks, each creditor is assigned an exposure value, on the basis of their credit rating. The group can invest short term funds and derivative financial instruments with banks which are rated A or higher by Standards and Poors. The impact on the audit of important transactions which occurred during the period As per the ASA 701 (Para9), the auditors shall emphasis on the matters relating to governance and those which demand their attention specifically. They should evaluate the areas of higher risk of substantial mismanagement in accordance with ASA 315.The areas involving key managerial decisions including assumptions of accounting calculations recognized as having the probability of uncertainty and the impact on audit of key transactions which occurred during the time span are important aspects which should attract the attention of auditors (Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, 2015). . With reference to Woolworths Limited, the auditors analyzed the following facts: The company is planning to close 30 stores due to uncertainty surrounding lease renewals and 34 stores were closed due to the uncertainty in lease renewals. The sale of Ezi Buy and transformation of Big W: The sale from discontinued operations amounted to $1867Million which is around 3 % of the total group sales in 2015. While in 2016, it amounted to $2,100 Million, which is 3.5 % of the total group sales in 2016. The sale of the products of Big W amounted to $3929 Million, which is 6.48 % of the total sales in 2015 while in 2016 it amounted to $3,820 Million, which is 6.35 % of total group sales. The matters relating to the accounting of the withdrawn operations by the group due to the sale of Big W and the risk of Ezi Buy , carrying cost of land, plant and machinery, the impairment of machinery ,stock which consist of the writing down of the stock to the net realizable value. The provision of the onerous lease expenses and other exit costs based on the net realizable value and their income tax benefits arising as a result from all these transactions are some of the provisions which require auditor's attention. Events affecting the companys capability to remain as a successful entity and its impacts According to ASA 570, the financial reports are maintained assuming that the entity would continue to operate as a successful entity in the future, until the administration dissolves it or stops its operations, in case it is left with no other alternative (Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, 2015). The decision of the administration if the entity would continue its operations as a successful entity depends upon the analysis of a number of factors. These include occurrence of the contingent events whose outcome is indefinite. The extent and complexity of the organization its characteristics, type and the nature of industry in which it operates also affect its ability to continue as a going concern in future. These aspects also influence its decision making abilities. So, if there is absence of continuity in its transactions, it cant be observed as a going concern. In the context of Woolworths Limited, pursuant to the withdrawn operations of the Home improvement division, the sale of Ezi Buy amounted to a loss of US$ 2,347.9 Million in the FY 2016 whereas the profit in 2015 amounted to US $2,137.4 Million in the FY 2015. It requires specific attention of the auditors as the group has sold 66.7 % shares of Hydrox pursuant to the sale of Lowes shares. This involves intense observation of the auditors with regards to accounting of the sale of the Home timber and hardware group, the onerous leases and exit values to be adjusted by the group (Grant Thornton, 2017). As the Assets held for sale are US$1,100.5Million in the FY 2016 which is 4.68 % of the total assets amounting to 23,502.2, so it does not affect the firms ability as a going concern. While in FY 2015 it was US$381.6 Million which is 1.5 % of the total assets amounting to US$ 25,336.8 Million. So, it doesnt affect the firms ability as a going concern (Woolworths Group , 2016). Apart from this the events relating to the carrying cost of land of BIG W , its plant and machinery ,its market risks pertaining to the cross currency swaps amounted to an unrealized gain of US$147.7 Million in 2016 as compared to a gain of US$122.4 Million in 2015. Also, its liquidity and credit risks will not affect the organizations ability as a going concern as per Auditing Standard ASA570. Conclusion To conclude, it can be said that the aim of audit is to configure and reveal their opinion regarding the financial reports and other relevant documents of the company. It should be conducted to ensure that the financial reports does not reveal material frauds or errors which may affect its capability to continue its operations in the future (Hay, Stewart Redmayne, 2017). The focus of the auditors is to test the accounting principles and estimates made by the management with relevance to the transactions made by the company. The steps involved in this procedure are gathering of the information and testing its authenticity and reliability .It is determined by suitable proofs at the operational level and in its records. The evaluation should arrive at a relevant conclusion with respect to the accounting transactions conducted by the company. If there are frauds or errors, then the auditing team should suggest the methods for their rectification .Also strict measures should be implement ed by the management to minimize their repetitiveness in the future (The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, 2013). Woolworths Limited, which is one of the biggest listed companies of Australia, has complied with the relevant Australian Auditing Standards. Also, the auditing team has evaluated the key transactions on the basis of the Australian Auditing Standards and suggested measures to improve the accounting procedures relating to its areas of operations. References Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (2013). Auditing Standard ASA 315 Identifying and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement through Understanding the Entity and Its Environment [ONLINE] Available from: : https://www.auasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/Nov13_Compiled_Auditing_Standard_ASA_315.pdf [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (2015). Auditing Standard ASA 701 Communicating Key Audit Matters in the Independent Auditors Report [ONLINE] Available from https://www.auasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/ASA_701_2015.pdf [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (2015). Auditing Standard ASA 570 Going Concern [ONLINE] Available from https://www.auasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/ASA_570_2015.pdf [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Deloitte (2018). Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu LLC [ONLINE] Available from https://www2.deloitte.com/jp/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/audit/audit.html [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Financial Times (2016). Equities [ONLINE] Available from https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/forecasts?s=WOW:ASX [Accessed 18th January, 2018]. Government of South Australia. Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (2014). Auditing Frequently asked questions. [ONLINE] Available from https://www.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/18226/Auditing_factsheet_-_September2014.pdf [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Grant Thornton (2017). IFRS Viewpoint. [ONLINE] Available from https://www.grantthornton.global/globalassets/1.-member-firms/global/insights/article-pdfs/2017/IFRS-Viewpoint-7-going-concern.pdf [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Hay, D. Stewart, J. Redmayne, N, B. (2017). The Role of Auditing in Corporate Governance in Australia and New Zealand: A Research Synthesis. Australian Accounting Review. 27(4). Khorwatt, E.(2015).Assessment of Business Risk and Control Risk in the Libyan Context. Open Journal of Accounting.4. Kristensen, R. H. (2015). Judgment in an auditors materiality assessments. Danish Journal of Management Business. 2. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (2013). Audit and Assurance Advanced Stage Technical Integration Level. [ONLINE] Available from https://www.icaew.com/~/media/corporate/files/qualifications%20and%20programmes/learning%20partners/learning%20materials/ti%20audit%20assurance%2020142015%20inspection%20copy.ashx [Accessed 8th January, 2018]. Vls?noiua, D. Buzenche (Matei),S. (2014). Determining Audit Materiality in the banking industry- a knowledge based approach. Procedia Economics and Finance.15. Woolworths Limited (2015). Annual Report 2015. [ONLINE] Available from https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/icms_docs/182381_Annual_Report_2015.pdf [Accessed 18th January, 2018]. Woolworths Group (2016). Financial Report 2016. [ONLINE] Available from https://wow2016ar.qreports.com.au/xresources/pdf/wow16ar-financial-report.pdf / [Accessed 18 th January, 2018]. Woolworths Group Limited (2018) Portfolio Businesses [ONLINE] Available from https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/page/about-us/our-brands/portfolio-businesses/ [Accessed 8th January, 2018].

Julius Ceaser Essay Brutus Character Analysis Marcus Brutus Essays

Julius Ceaser Essay: Brutus Character Analysis Marcus Brutus Julius Ceaser Essay: Brutus Character Analysis Marcus Brutus William Shakespeare's play, The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, is mainly based on the assassination of Julius Caesar. The character who was in charge of the assassination was, ironically, Marcus Brutus, a servant and close friend to Julius Caesar. But what would cause a person to kill a close friend? After examining Brutus' relationship to Caesar, his involvement in the conspiracy, and his importance to the plot, the truth can be revealed. Marcus Brutus, a servant and close friend to Caesar, has a strong relationship with Caesar but a stronger relationship with Rome and its people. Brutus is very close to Caesar. In Roman times, the only way for someone to get close to a person of high rank is if he/she is close to him/her. In many points of the play, Brutus was talking and next to Caesar. Brutus also loves Caesar but fears his power. In the early acts of the play, Brutus says to Cassius, "What means this shouting? I do fear the people do choose Caesar for their king...yet I love him well."(act 1, scene 2, ll.85-89), as he is speaking to Cassius. Brutus loves Caesar, but would not allow him to "climber-upward...He then unto the ladder turns his back..."(act 2, scene 1, ll.24,26). As the quote says, Brutus would not allow Caesar to rise to power and then turn his back onto the people of Rome. After the assassination of Julius Caesar, Brutus talks to Antony about Caesar's death. "Our hearts you see not; they are pitiful; and pity to the general wrong of Rome..."(act 3, scene 1, ll.185-186). Brutus says that Antony cannot see their(members of the conspiracy) hearts, which are full of pity. Again, this shows how Brutus loved Caesar but cared for the life of Rome and its people more. This is the only reason Brutus would conspire against Caesar. For Brutus says to himself, "I know no personal cause to spurn at him...How that might change his nature..."(act 2, scene1, ll. 1,13) Caesar's relationship with Brutus is also strong. Just allowing Brutus to speak to Caesar shows his respect for Brutus. Caesar feels that Brutus is noble to him and does the right thing regardless of personal danger. On the Ides of March, as Caesar was assassinated, Caesar's last line is: "Et tu, Brute?--Then fall, Caesar."(act 3, scene 1, l.85). This shows that Caesar would not die without Brutus' stab. Caesar realizes that there must be a noble reason for this assassination if Brutus was in it. This again shows how much Caesar respects Brutus. Brutus and Caesar both respect each other, but in different ways. Marcus Brutus had a very important role in the conspiracy against Caesar. He was the "back-bone" of the plan. According to Cassius, Brutus' main purpose in the conspiracy is for an insurance policy. The people will think, since Brutus is noble to Caesar, that there is a good reason for Caesar's assassination. Brutus will also be the leader of the conspiracy for another "insurance policy" for the assassination. Cassius is the one who declares this, "Brutus shall lead the way, and we will grace his heels with the most boldest and best hearts of Rome. "(act 3, scene 1, ll.135-136). Again, if Brutus leads the way, the people will think that the death of Julius Caesar wasn't such a bad thing. Brutus also declares to himself that his role in the conspiracy is to save Rome. He says to the people that, "If then that friend demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."(Act 3,scene 2,ll.21-24). If Brutus was not in the plot of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, the conspiracy would probably not have worked. Since Brutus "...loved Rome more."(Act 3,scene2, ll.23-24), he decided to be a part of the conspiracy. If he hadn't loved Rome more than Caesar, he would not have joined in the assassination of Julius Caesar. Cassius and the rest of the conspirators would probably not have continued on without Brutus because they would have no "insurance" afterwards. The people would think that there was no reason for Caesar's death and most likely beheaded all the conspirators. Also, if Brutus was not in the play, the whole end of the play would not ever occur. Brutus would not be there to have an army or kill himself, and Cassius will already be beheaded. If Brutus was not in the play, the title would have absolutely no

Arizona V Johnson Essays

Arizona V Johnson Essays Arizona V Johnson Paper Arizona V Johnson Paper Arizona v Johnson (2009) 129 S. Ct. 781 Date of Judgment: January 26, 2009 INTRODUCTION In 2002, Lemon Montrea Johnson was the passenger in the backseat of a car stopped for a traffic violation. Johnson was charged with; inter alia, possession of drugs and possession of a weapon by a felon. These items were discovered during a protective pat-down search of Johnson. Johnson was convicted by the trial court. Johnson argued that his conviction should be overturned because the trial court was in error by denying his motion to suppress the evidence. He argued that he had been unlawfully â€Å"seized† because being a passenger in a vehicle does not automatically constitute â€Å"seizure. † He furthered argued that even if he had been â€Å"seized,† that by the time Officer Trevizo searched him he was no longer â€Å"seized† as their conversation had become consensual. Furthermore, the evidence should not be considered because the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights and because the officer had no reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was occurring as mandated by Terry v Ohio. On September 10, 2007, the Arizona Court of Appeals overturned the conviction. The court concluded that Trevizo had no right to pat Johnson down even though she believed he was armed and dangerous. The court held that Johnson, although legally detained, had evolved into consensual conversation with officer Trevizo regarding his gang affiliation. This conversation was not connected to the traffic stop of the driver; therefore, the officer may not conduct a pat-down without reasonable cause to believe that â€Å"criminal activity may be afoot. On appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the state argued that police officers should have the right to conduct a pat-down search if they believe the person may be armed and dangerous. On June 23, 2008 the United States Supreme Court granted the State’s petition for a writ of certiorari. The question presented in this case is do police officers have the authority to â€Å"stop and frisk† a passenger in a motor vehicle temporar ily detained upon police detection of a traffic infraction on the basis they believe the person may be armed and dangerous, even when there is no reasonable suspicion of criminal activity? The Supreme Court decided that yes an officer’s reasonable belief that a person is armed and dangerous is sufficient for performing a pat-down search. They established that a Terry â€Å"stop† is met when police lawfully detain a vehicle and its occupants on a traffic violation. The police do not have to believe anyone in the vehicle is involved in criminal activity. A Terry â€Å"frisk† is justified if police reasonably believe the person may be armed and dangerous. Although this case is based on conditions of a traffic stop, one has to wonder if this will open the door to intrusive searches by officers in varying situations. FACTS On April 19, 2002, Officer Maria Trevizo and Detectives Machado and Gittings, members of Arizona’s gang task force, were patrolling in the Tucson neighborhood Sugar Hill, an area associated with the Crips gang. Around 9 p. m. , they pulled over a vehicle after a license plate check revealed its registration had been suspended for mandatory insurance law. The vehicle had three occupants, the driver, a passenger in the front seat, and Lemon Montrea Johnson, respondent, in the back seat. At the time of the stop, the officers had no reason to suspect anyone in the vehicle of criminal activity. The officers walked toward the car. Machado told the occupants to keep their hands in sight. He inquired if there were any weapons in the vehicle, all three said no. Machado instructed the driver to get out of the car. Gittings talked to the front seat passenger, who remained in the vehicle throughout the duration of the traffic stop. Machado interviewed the driver regarding the insurance and registration. Trevizo dealt with Johnson. As Officer Trevizo approached the vehicle, she noticed Johnson alternately watching the officers and commenting to the front seat passenger. This alerted Officer Trevizo. When she drew closer to the vehicle, she noticed Johnson wearing a blue bandana, the chosen color of the Crips. Additionally, she observed that Johnson had a police scanner in his jacket, which she found to be unusual and cause for concern, as† most people† would not carry a scanner â€Å"unless they’re going to be involved in some kind of criminal activity or [are] going to try to evade the police by listening to the scanner. † Trevizo questioned Johnson, who did not have any identification with him but he did provide his name and date of birth. He also stated he was from Eloy, Arizona, a known home to the Crips. Johnson revealed he was a convicted felon who had served prison time for burglary. These factors led Officer Trevizo to believe Johnson may have been a gang member. Officer Trevizo wanted to gather intelligence about the gang Johnson may have been in, as gathering intelligence was one of her main missions in the task force. Officer Trevizo wished to question Johnson away from the others and asked Johnson to get out of the car. Johnson complied. Officer Trevizo was trained extensively as a gang task force officer and knew gang members generally tend to carry a gun. She was concerned for her safety, but did not have a reasonable indication that â€Å"Johnson was engaged in or about to engaged in criminal activity. † When Johnson got out of the car, Trevizo â€Å"patted him down for officer safety. † While patting Johnson down, Trevizo discovered a gun. At that time, Johnson began to struggle. Officer Trevizo hand cuffed Johnson. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Trial Court Johnson was charged with possession of a weapon by a prohibited possessor, possession of marijuana, and resisting arrest. On October 31, 2005, Johnson filed a motion to suppress evidence found on his person during the pat-down search. The motion was denied. In November, 2005, Johnson was found guilty of the weapons charge as well as possession of marijuana, but not of resisting arrest. He was sentenced to eight years and one year concurrently. B. Arizona Court of Appeals Johnson appealed. The Arizona Court of Appeals in State v Johnson reversed the conviction. The majority held that Johnson was lawfully detained at the time of the stop; however, the conversation between Trevizo and Johnson had turned into a consensual one that was unrelated to the traffic stop. Since Trevizo had no indication that criminal activity was occurring, she had no right pat Johnson down even if she believed he was armed and dangerous. The court referred to Terry v Ohio finding that a Terry stop allows officers to conduct a pat-down search in order to protect the officers, a consensual search does not as they stated in Ilono H: â€Å"Terry and its Supreme Court progeny addressed the propriety of a pat-down search exclusively in the context of a lawful investigatory stop. We do not read those cases to authorize a pat-down search as part of a mere consensual encountereven hen an officer may have grounds to believe the targets of the encounter are potentially armed and dangerous. † The court also drew upon the Supreme Court’s holding in Brendlin v California to determine if Johnson had been lawfully seized. In Brendlin v California, â€Å"a passenger is seized when the vehicle in which he or she is riding in is lawfully stopped by police. However, Johns on contended that even though he had been seized that was no longer the case because it had turned into a â€Å"consensual encounter before Trevizo patted him down. The court cited cases that stated a traffic stop may become consensual â€Å"when officers return the license or registration to a stopped driver, issue the driver a citation or warning, or tells the driver he or she is free to go† or â€Å"asks questions without further constraining the driver by an overbearing show of authority. † The court could not find any case law to establish that point with a passenger, but they reasoned that common sense suggests that at some point the passenger should be free to walk away. To decide when that point was, they applied a standard of reasonableness. The court elaborated on what was a consensual encounter. They considered a consensual encounter is if a person cooperates with the police voluntarily, answering non-coercive questioning. Additionally, if that person is free to leave at any time, he or she is not seized under the Fourth Amendment. Furthermore, the court stated that the encounter would not be consensual if the person did not feel free to leave. In Johnson’s case, the reason Officer Trevizo wished to speak with Johnson to learn more about his gang affiliation, not about the traffic stop and Trevizo testified that Johnson was free to leave at any time. The court stated that Trevizo could have ordered the passengers out of the car, but she did not. Trevizo had also stated that Johnson could have refused to get out of the car. Arizona case law agrees that a Terry stop can evolve into a consensual encounter as in State v Navarro. In Navarro’s case, a suspect in a shooting was taken into custody during a valid Terry stop, but the court determined it evolved into a consensual encounter because the suspect had not been â€Å"confront[ed] and surround[ed] at the initial detention† His handcuffs were removed and he voluntarily agreed to go (unfrisked and in the officer’s front seat) down town with the officer to talk about the shooting. In comparing the cases, the court believed Navarro was subjected to a greater level of coercion than Johnson. After examining every aspect of Johnson’s encounter with Trevizo, the court determined that Johnson’s getting out of the car to talk to Trevizo was consensual. They stated any â€Å"reasonable person in Johnson’s position and under these circumstances would have felt he could have remained in the vehicle. † They acknowledged that Trevizo had a reason to believe Johnson was armed and dangerous (clothing, scanner, hometown) but that fact alone did not give her the right to pat Johnson down in a consensual encounter. They determined that the trial court made an error when they chose not to suppress the evidence found. They reversed Johnson’s convictions and sentences and remanded the case for further proceedings. Judge Espinosa dissented. He found it unrealistic to conclude that just because Trevizo did not use coercion and Johnson volunteered to talk to her, made the encounter evolve into a consensual encounter. Consequently, Trevizo, fearing for her safety and the safety of others, could not legally conduct a pat-down search. The dissent noted that in Ilono H. the right to conduct a pat-down search should be dependent on the legality of the original Terry stop. Additionally, the dissent stated Arizona courts had many cases affirming the right of an officer to conduct a pat-down search when there is reasonable concern for his safety, as in State v Riley where a passenger was patted down during a traffic stop, in State v Valle where a passenger was patted down after he reached for his waistband when he was asked if he had a weapon, and in Adams v Williams that stated an â€Å"The purpose of this limited search is not to discover evidence of crime, but to allow the officer to pursue his investigation without fear of violence. The dissent continued that this was a legal traffic stop and since Officer Trevizo believed Johnson was armed and was a threat to her as well as the others; therefore she had the right to conduct a pat-down search of Johnson. The Arizona Supreme Court denied review. C. United States Supreme Court The State of Arizona appealed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed the judgment of the Arizona Cou rt of Appeals. They began by looking at Terry v Ohio. The police must have a reasonable belief that a person is engaged in criminal activity in order to stop him or her and a reasonable suspicion that the person temporarily detained is armed and dangerous in order to frisk him or her â€Å"stop and frisk. † â€Å"Because a limited search of outer clothing for weapons serves to protect both the officer and the public, a pat-down is constitutional. † With traffic stops being short in nature, similar to the detention authorized in Terry, the threat of danger to the police officer is heightened who is authorized to reduce the risk by taking â€Å"unquestioned command of the situation. To elaborate on Johnson being in a Terry situation, the court referred to Pennsylvania v Mimms which held that it does not violate the Fourth Amendment â€Å"because the governments legitimate and weighty interest in officer safety outweighs the de minimis additional   [**699]  intrusion of requiring a driver, already lawfully stopped, to e xit the vehicle. † Once outside the vehicle, Terry v Ohio states the driver can be then be patted down if there is suspicion he is armed and dangerous. The Mimms rule pertains to passengers as well as to drivers. They both have the same motivation to steer clear of being arrested for more significant crimes than traffic related offenses they have the same motivation to use violence to avoid such arrest. The safety of the officer outweighs the â€Å"minimal† intrusion of being asked to get out of the car and all the occupants of the vehicle have already been seized by nature of the car stop. The Supreme Court held that the Arizona court was in error in believing that Trevizo and Johnson’s encounter had evolved into a consensual encounter. Trevizo had not told Johnson he was free to leave nor did she inform him he did not have to cooperate with her and answer her questions. In other words, she did not give Johnson any reason to believe that her interrogation was consensual. Furthermore, a lawful roadside stop begins when the vehicle is pulled over and ends when police no longer need to control the situation at which time they inform the driver and passengers they are free to leave. A reasonable passenger would understand that as long as the car was seized, he was seized as well. The fact that Johnson was being interrogated about matters other than traffic would not change that understanding. Nothing had happened in the encounter before the frisk that would lead Johnson to believe he was free to leave without the officer’s permission. In a unanimous decision written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Supreme Court reversed the Arizona Court of Appeals. Arizona v Johnson was reversed and remanded. The Court held that Johnson’s encounter was not consensual and did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights. The court opined: valid traffic stops give officers the right to detain the driver and passengers for the duration of the stop; drivers and passengers may be removed from the vehicle with no additional justification; occupants may be asked for identification; if the officer reasonably believes the person may be armed and dangerous, he may conduct a pat-down search (even if he does not believe the person has been or is engaged in criminal activity); officers may inquire or converse about matters other than the traffic stop without it turning in to a consensual encounter as long as it does not â€Å"meaningfully prolong† the traffic stop. LEGAL BACKGROUND The Fourth Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution states: â€Å"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. † When the Fourth Amendment law was created, no one could have predicted the controversy that would follow in this era of mobility. The first time the Court had to address how the Fourth Amendment applies to searches of automobiles was in 1925, Carroll v United States. Two men were suspected of bootlegging. The police pulled them over and discovered illegal liquor in the trunk of their automobile. The defendants argued there was no warrant served allowing police to search their vehicle, therefore, the evidence should be suppressed. The Court disagreed, reasoning it was impractical to obtain a warrant due the mobility of an automobile. The Court noted difference between buildings and automobiles. Automobiles have the ability to leave the jurisdiction, taking the evidence with them, before a warrant could be obtained. The ruling in Carroll v United States enacted warrantless searches of vehicles are permissible if there was â€Å"probable cause† to believe contraband could be in the vehicle and belief that the vehicle could be moved before the officer could get a warrant. This became known as the â€Å"automobile exception. † The Court had created distinct guidelines for searching, with or without warrant. Now they needed to determine a clear definition of seizure. The benchmark case to define seizure is Terry v Ohio. The â€Å"stop and frisk† procedure was formally created in the case of Terry v Ohio. In October, 1963 a police officer observed two suspicious acting men standing on a street corner. One of the men would leave, walk down the street, look carefully in store windows, continue walking, turn around and look in the same windows again, and return to the corner to talk to the other man again. The second man did the same thing. In fact, they went back and forth six times. The police officer found this behavior highly bizarre and believed they were going to rob the store they had been observing. This led him to believe they were probably armed as well. He followed the men around the corner, where they were meeting with a third man. He approached them and asked their names. They mumbled incoherently. The officer grabbed the man in the middle (Terry) and patted down the outside of his clothing. He found a pistol in the left breast pocket of his jacket, but he could not retrieve it, so he asked them to go into the store. He removed Terry’s jacket and retrieved the pistol. The officer patted down the second man and found a pistol on him as well. The third man did not have a weapon on him. The men were taken into custody and charged with carrying a concealed weapon. Terry moved that the evidence should be suppressed as the evidence found was the result of an illegal search which violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The judge denied this motion stating that the officer’s experience granted enough cause to conduct an interrogation. The defense appealed to the Supreme Court. The main issue the Supreme Court had to deal with was whether or not Terry’s Fourth Amendment rights had been violated by unreasonable search and seizure. They held what came to be known as â€Å"stop and frisk,† which contained two parts. First, an officer may stop a person if he has â€Å"reasonable suspicion,† based on articulable facts that the person has committed or is in the process of committing a crime. The existence of reasonable suspicion depends on the overall view of the circumstances, including the† information known to the officer† and any â€Å"reasonable inferences to be drawn at the time of the stop. † This â€Å"investigative stop† does not require â€Å"probable cause† found the Fourth Amendment’s warrant clause. Probable cause in short is a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. † In determining what is probable cause . . . [w]e are concerned only with the question whether the affiant had reasonable grounds at the time of his affidavit . . . for the belief that the law was being violated on the premises to be searched; and if the apparent facts set out in the affidavit are such that a reasonably discreet and prudent man would be led to believe that there was a commission of the offense charged, there is probable cause justifying the issuance of a warrant. A person, within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, is seized â€Å"whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his freedom to walk away. † They also determined that patting down the outer clothing is a â€Å"search† under that Amendment. Second, to proceed from the â€Å"stop† to the â€Å"frisk† â€Å"a reasonably prudent officer must believe that he or others are in d anger, then he may make a reasonable search of the person that he believes is armed and dangerous, regardless if he is certain the person is armed or regardless of whether or not he has cause to arrest the person. They stated that police must have probable cause and when possible have a warrant to search. In on-the-spot cases, however, it is not practical to obtain a warrant. The officer in the Terry case did have reason to suspect the men were armed. Therefore, the Supreme Court affirmed Terry’s conviction. Elaborating on whether or not a person has been seized is found in United States v Mendenhall. The Court held that a person is seized â€Å"if, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. On February 10, 1976, Sylvia Mendenhall flew in to the Detroit Metropolitan Airport on a flight from Los Angeles. DEA agents observed her behavior as suspicious as if she were possibly carrying illegal drugs. The agents approached her and asked for identification and her airline ticket. Her airline ticket showed her name as â€Å"Annette Ford. † When questioned, she responded she just felt like using that name. Agent Anderson asked Mendenhall to go with him to the airport DEA office. She did. He asked her if she would allow him to search her handbag, clearing stating she did not have to if she did not want to. She handed him the handbag. A female officer arrived to search her person. Before proceeding, the officer asked Mendenhall if she consented to being searched which she responded she did. When heroin was found, she was arrested. The District Court denied Mendenhall’s motion to suppress, since she had consented to the search. The question to the Supreme Court was whether or not Mendenhall was â€Å"seized† when the DEA agents first approached her and requested her identification. The Court concluded that a person has been â€Å"seized† if considering all the circumstances, a reasonable person in that situation, would believe he did not have the freedom to leave. According to Mendenhall, without â€Å"reasonable suspicion† law enforcement may make consensual contact with a person. The person does don have to answer any questions. As long as he or she is free to walk away, the encounter does not violate any liberties granted in the Fourth Amendment. In Pennsylvania v Mimms, the Court held that an officer may order a driver out of the car, provided the traffic stop was lawful. Two Philadelphia policemen were patrolling when they noticed a car with an expired license. They pulled the car over to ticket the driver for driving with expired tags. One of the officers asked the driver, Mimms, to step out of the vehicle to provide his license and registration. Upon doing so, the officer noticed a â€Å"bulge under his jacket. † The officer frisked Mimms and found a loaded 38-caliber revolver. Mimms was charged and convicted with carrying a concealed deadly weapon and unlawfully carrying a firearm without a license in the trial court. Mimms moved to suppress the evidence. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the conviction after determining that the way the gun was discovered was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. They held that the officer’s request for Mimms to get out of the car was an unlawful seizure, protected against in the Fourth Amendment. â€Å"This was so because the officer could not point to â€Å"objective observable facts to support a suspicion that criminal activity was afoot or that the occupants of the vehicle posed a threat to police safety. † They continued that the officer should have never had the opportunity to notice the bulge; therefore, the search should have never taken place. The United States Supreme Court did not agree with the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. The Court referred to Terry v Ohio as setting the standard of whether the facts available to the officer at the moment of the seizure or the search `warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that the action taken was appropriate there is little doubt that the officer was justified. The Court stated â€Å"the officers safety outweighs the additional intrusion of the driver to get out of the car which was â€Å"de minimis† since he was already detained by the traffic stop. The Court reversed the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Maryland v Wilson extended the ruling of Pennsylvania v Mimms that an officer may order the driver out of the car, to passengers as well. A Maryland state trooper pulled over a speeding car on I-95 in Baltimore County. The officer noticed the passenger, Wilson, sweating and appearing to be very nervous. The officer ordered Wilson to get out of the car . When he did, a quantity of cocaine fell on the ground. Wilson was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to deliver. The Baltimore County Circuit Court granted the motion to suppress the evidence stating that ordering Wilson to get out of the car violated his Fourth Amendment rights, constituting an unreasonable seizure. The Maryland Court of Special Appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court had to decide whether or not the ruling in Mimms should be extended to include passengers. The Court held that the ruling should extend to the passengers as the â€Å"additional intrusion of exiting the vehicle as â€Å"de minimis† in comparison to the officer’s safety. The Court reasoned that a passenger would have the same motivation as a driver prevent additional crimes from being discovered during the stop, thereby, bringing the threat of violence from the passenger. The Arizona Court of Appeals relied on two Arizona cases they felt set precedent in this case, State v Navarro and In re Ilono H. In Navarro, a shooting had taken place. A few hours later, police stopped a car near the sc ene of the shooting. One of the passengers met the description of the shooter. He was handcuffed then questioned by the police. After conversing ith the police, they removed the handcuffs and asked Navarro to go with an officer to the police station. Navarro agreed to go with the officer. He was allowed to sit, unrestrained, in the front seat with the officer. Navarro was not told he was free to go, nor did he express a desire to leave. At the police station, Navarro was left in the interrogation room unattended, while the officer went to buy him a drink. Navarro agreed to have his testimony taped, his photograph taken, and to be fingerprinted. Navarro signed consent forms and admitted he was aware of his Miranda rights. This led to the conviction of Navarro. Navarro argued the evidence was illegally obtained. Navarro argued the legal detention had evolved into an illegal arrest when he went with the officer to the station. The court held that Navarro was neither in custody, nor under arrest when he agreed to go to the police station because â€Å"under the circumstances, a reasonable, innocent person would have felt free to decline the officer’s request to accompany him for questioning downtown. † In Ilono H. , two policemen approached five people in a park who were known for drug activity. They were dressed in red, a color associated with gang activity. After talking with the individuals, officers conducted pat down searches of the youth because gang members often carry weapons. The pat-down revealed Ilono had a 40-ounce beer on him. He was arrested for illegal possession of alcohol. In a search incident to the arrest, cocaine was found in Ilono’s pocket. Ilono was convicted. On appeal to the Arizona Court of Appeals, the court determined that a Terry frisk is only allowed when the officer believes the person is, or will be in the near future, engaged in criminal activity. The court found that this was a consensual encounter, which an officer may initiate but it may be terminated at any point if the person so desires. The court held that the officers did not have a right to make an investigatory stop because they had no reasonable belief Ilono had committed or was committing a crime; therefore, the pat-down search was illegal in this consensual encounter. The two most recent Supreme Court cases setting important precedent in Arizona v Johnson is Knowles v Iowa and Brendlin v California. In Knowles v Iowa, Knowles was pulled over for speeding. In lieu of an arrest, the officer issued Knowles a citation. After issuing the citation, the officer searched the vehicle. He found marijuana along with a pipe and charged him with possession. The issue at hand was, considering the officer had not made an arrest, did he have the authority to conduct the search consistent with the Fourth Amendment? The Court said â€Å"no. † The issue at hand was not the subject referred to by the Court in Arizona v Johnson. The issue brought up was that the Court in that case stated â€Å"that officers who conduct ‘routine traffic stop[s]’ many ‘perform a pat-down of a driver and any passengers upon reasonable suspicion that they may be armed and dangerous. In Brendlin, the Court held that a passenger is seized, according to the Fourth Amendment, just as the driver is seized. On November 27, 2001 in Sutter County, California, Bruce Brendlin was a passenger in a vehicle pulled over for an expired registration. The officer had inquired about the registration earlier in the day while th e car was parked. He had been informed that the renewal was being processed and the temporary registration was displayed in the back window was legal. While addressing the driver, Karen Simeroth, the officer recognized Brendlin as one of the â€Å"Brendlin Brothers. † The officer was certain he was a parole violator. After verifying that indeed Brendlin was a parole violator, the officer called for backup, ordered Brendlin out of the car at gunpoint, and arrested him and the driver. In the search incident to arrest, the officer found a syringe cap on Brendlin, syringes and marijuana on Simeroth, and methamphetamine along with equipment used to manufacture the drug in the vehicle. Brendlin argued to suppress the evidence stating that he was unlawfully seized by the traffic stop because the officer did not have probable cause to make the stop. Brendlin was denied by the trial court as they stated Brendlin was not seized until the officer ordered him out of the car and therefore did not have the right to challenge the legality of the stop. The California Court of Appeals reversed the decision made by the trial court. This court found that Brendlin was seized by the traffic stop; however, they determined the traffic stop was illegal. The United States Supreme Court had to decide whether or not a passenger is seized, according to the Fourth Amendment, in a traffic stop. The Court used the analogy of â€Å"whether a reasonable person in Brendlin’s position when the car was stopped would have believed himself free to ‘terminate the encounter’ between the police and himself. † The Court held â€Å"We think that in these circumstances any reasonable passenger would have understood the police officers to be exercising control to the point that no one in the car was free to depart without police permission. The Court explained that a traffic stop limits the actions of the passenger just as it does the driver and that the officer initiating the traffic stop â€Å"acts with an implicit claim of right based on fault of some sort, and a sensible person would not expect a police officer to allow people to come and go freely. † Therefore, the Court concluded that the Brendlin was seized by t he traffic stop â€Å"despite the fact that he was merely a passenger and not the target of the stop itself,† consequently he did have the right to challenge if his Fourth Amendment rights had been violated. COURT’S RATIONALE Before Johnson, according to Terry v Ohio, law enforcement was allowed to detain a person briefly if they believed he is was in the process of committing a crime or had committed a crime. Additionally, if the officer believed the detainee was armed and dangerous, the officer was allowed to conduct a pat-down of the detainee’s outer clothing to ensure he had no weapons on him. The Arizona Court of Appeals interpreted the Terry ruling did not apply to a person involved in a consensual encounter if the officer did not believe criminal activity was occurring, even if they believed he was armed and dangerous. The question this court asked was Johnson â€Å"seized† when he was frisked or had the encounter turned into a consensual conversation? They did refer to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Brendlin v California that a passenger is â€Å"seized† during a traffic stop, however, they noted that the Court did not designate when the seizure ended. They reasoned that â€Å"common sense† would allow that there must be a point in time where the passengers in the vehicle are free to leave and that â€Å"their fate is not entirely tied to that of the driver. They further compared this case to In re Ilono H. and reasoned that since Johnson was engaging in conversation unrelated to the traffic stop with Officer Trevizo, it had evolved into a separate consensual encounter. The court emphasized that Officer Trevizo believed Johnson was free to terminate the encounter at any time. The court also compared Johnson to Navarro. They determined Navarro had been subj ect to a greater level of coercion that Johnson had been and that the reasonable person in Johnson’s position would have believed he was free to stay in the vehicle. Furthermore, since Officer Trevizo had no suspicion that Johnson was involved in criminal activity, she had no right to frisk him, even if she believed he was armed and dangerous. Since the court had determined the encounter was consensual, they held that the evidence found should be suppressed. Judge Philip Espinosa dissented stating that the majority had placed police in greater danger. Judge Espinosa pointed out the language of Ilono H. stated a pat-down search should rely on the legality of the original stop and that in this case the original stop was legal. He also pointed out that Arizona courts had long acknowledged the right of an Arizona officer to conduct pat-down searches when he has a â€Å"reasonable concern for his safety. † Since Officer Trevizo did have a concern for her safety and the stop was legal, the dissent concluded the search was lawful and the evidence should not be suppressed. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Ginsburg, the Court established that an officer may pat-down a passenger in a vehicle during the course of a traffic stop if the officer has an articulable suspicion to believe that person is armed and dangerous. ANALYSIS The Fourth Amendment is critical when it comes to protecting the rights of individuals from unreasonable seizures and searches. Johnson’s case required the Court to set a balance between these rights and the safety of law enforcement. The Supreme Court had already made exceptions to warrantless searches in Terry v Ohio. This Johnson decision expanded the Terry rule of †stop and frisk† to traffic stops. The Court reasoned that traffic stops indicate to a reasonable passenger that he is â€Å"seized† along with the passenger for the duration of the stop. Additionally, the Court noted that traffic stops are â€Å"fraught with danger to police officers. Unlike Terry, however, no longer do police need to believe the detainee is engaged in or has been engaged in criminal activity, they just need to â€Å"reasonably suspect† the person subjected to the pat-down is armed and dangerous. Conclusion The significance of this holding is that it increased officer safety by allowing them to pat-down a person, â€Å"seized† by a traffic stop (be it driver or passenger), provided the stop is legal and the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person may be armed and dangerous. The Supreme Court has always faced the challenging job: balancing individual liberties with need for law and order. Fourth street advocates state this is another nail in the coffin of our Fourth Amendment rights. As with any expansion of police authority, there is always the chance of abuse of power. It is possible some police will abuse this power, using pat-downs during routine traffic stops in the hopes of turning a speeding ticket into something more interesting. Could Johnson eventually apply to any person the police may confront and/or detain? Pat-down searches are intrusive, humiliating, and embarrassing. Does this give law enforcement to pat-down anyone, anywhere under the disguise of officer safety? Will this lead to targeting and profiling? Will police be able to ignore the plastic baggie found while searching for weapons? Furthermore, will this prevent individuals from voluntarily interacting with police, knowing they may be frisked? Time will tell. On the other hand, officer safety is paramount. Not allowing officers to search occupants, within the context of a traffic stop, for weapons when there may be a threat to their safety would cripple their ability to perform their job effectively. Johnson was fresh out of prison, wearing gang colors, and carrying a police scanner. Even to an untrained civilian, it would seem common sense to frisk Johnson. In this case, highly trained Officer Trevizo took the chance that the evidence may have been suppressed, but that chance may have saved her life as well as the other officers. If Johnson had been allowed to leave the scene with the weapon, other lives were in jeopardy. The fact that the everyday law abiding citizen may face an intrusive pat-down seems a small price to pay for protecting the law enforcement that are sworn to protect and serve. The bottom line is the Supreme Court unanimously decided that officer safety comes first. It is what it is. 1 ]. State v Johnson, 170 3d 667, 668,674 (Ariz. Ct. App, 2007). [ 2 ]. Id. [ 3 ]. Id. at 669. [ 4 ]. Id. [ 5 ]. Id. at 668. [ 6 ]. Id. at 671. [ 7 ]. Id. [ 8 ]. Bill of Rights Amendment IV, The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particul arly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [ 9 ]. Terry v Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889 (1968). The court held that an officer is justified in conducting a limited search of persons whom he suspects may be armed and dangerous in order to discover any weapons which might be used to assault him or others nearby, even if they have no suspicion that the passenger has committed any crime. [ 10 ]. Id. at 667. [ 11 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 669. [ 12 ]. Id. [ 13 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 667 (quoting Terry v Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 30 (1968)). [ 14 ]. Arizona v Johnson, 128 S. Ct. 339, 172 L. Ed. 2d 14 (2008). [ 15 ]. Id. [ 16 ]. Id. [ 17 ]. Id. [ 18 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 668. [ 19 ]. Id. [ 20 ]. Id. [ 21 ]. Joint Appendix at 29, Johnson, 128 S. Ct. 2961 (No. 07-1122). [ 22 ]. Joint Appendix at 14. [ 23 ]. Id. at 15. [ 24 ]. Id. at 31. [ 25 ]. Id. at 42-43. [ 26 ]. Id. [ 27 ]. Id. at 12. [ 28 ]. Id. at 17. [ 29 ]. Id. at 16. [ 30 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 667, 669. [ 31 ]. Id. [ 32 ]. Joint Appendix at 19, Johnson, 128 S. Ct. 2961 (No. 07-1122). [ 33 ]. Id. [ 34 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 669. [ 35 ]. Joint Appendix at 10, Johnson, 128 S. Ct. 2961 (No. 07-1122). [ 36 ]. Id. at 29. [ 37 ]. Id. at 20. [ 38 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 669-670. [ 39 ]. Id. [ 40 ]. Id. at 669-670. [ 41 ]. Id. [ 42 ]. Id. at 668. [ 43 ]. Id. [ 44 ]. Id. at 671. [ 45 ]. Id. at 673. 46 ]. Id. [ 47 ]. Terry v Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968). [ 48 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 671. [ 49 ]. Ilono H. , 210 Ariz. 473, P2, 113 P. 3d at 697. [ 50 ]. Id. at P12. [ 51 ]. Brendlin v California, U. S. 127 S. Ct. 2400, 2410, 168 L. Ed. 2d 132 (2007). [ 52 ]. Id. [ 53 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 671. [ 54 ]. United States v Hernandez, 93 F. 3d 1493, 1498 (10th Cir. 1996). [ 55 ]. United States v Werking, 915 F. 2d 1404, 1408-09 (10th Cir. 1990). [ 56 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 671. [ 57 ]. Id. [ 58 ]. Hernandez, 93 F. 3d at 1498. [ 59 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 672. [ 60 ]. Id. 61 ]. Id. [ 62 ]. State v Navarro, 201 Ariz. 272, 34 P. 3d 971 (App. 2001). [ 63 ]. Id. [ 64 ]. Id. [ 65 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 672. [ 66 ]. Id. [ 67 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 60, 170 P. 3d at 672. [ 68 ]. Id. [ 69 ]. Ilono H. , 210 Ariz. 473, P2, 113 P. 3d at 697. This was a consensual encounter, not a traffic stop between a juvenile and an officer. [ 70 ]. State v Riley, 196 Ariz. 40, P16, 992 P. 2d 1135, 1140 (App. 1999). [ 71 ]. State v Valle, 196 Ariz. 324, P9, 996 P. 2d 125, 128 (App. 2000). [ 72 ]. Adams v Williams, 407 U. S. 143, 146, 92 S. Ct. 1921, 1923, 32 L. Ed. 2d 612 (1972). [ 73 ]. Johnson, 217 Ariz. 0, 170 P. 3d at 672. [ 74 ]. State v Johnson, 2007 Ariz. LEXIS 154 (Ariz. Nov. 29, 2007). [ 75 ] . Arizona v Johnson, 128 S. Ct. 2961, 171 L. Ed. 2d 884, 2008 U. S. LEXIS 5208, 76 U. S. L. W. 3673 (U. S. 2008). [ 76 ]. Arizona v Johnson, 129 S. Ct. 781, 172 L. Ed. 2d 694, 2009 U. S. LEXIS 868, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 620 (U. s. 2009). [ 77 ]. Terry v Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968). [ 78 ]. Id. at 24. [ 79 ]. Id. at 23-24, 27, 30-31. [ 80 ]. Berkemer v McCarty, 468, U. S. 420, 439, n. 29, 104 S. Ct. 3138, 82 L. Ed 2d 317 [ 81 ]. Michigan v Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1047, 103 S. Ct. 3469, 77 L. Ed 2d 1204. [ 82 ]. Maryland v Wilson, 519 U. S. 408, 414, 117 S. Ct. 882, 137 L. Ed 2d 41. [ 83 ]. Pennsylvania v Mimms, 434 U. S. 106, 98 S. Ct. 330, 54 L. Ed. 2d, 331. [ 84 ]. Id. at 111. [ 85 ]. Id. at 110-111. [ 86 ]. Terry v Ohio, 434 U. S. , at 112. [ 87 ]. Pennsylvania v Mimms, 434 U. S. 106 [ 88 ]. Johnson 129 S. Ct. 781, at 698. [ 89 ]. Id. [ 90 ]. Brendlin, 551 U. S. , at 257. [ 91 ]. Johnson 129 S. Ct. 781, at 698. [ 92 ]. U. S. Constitution – Amendment 4. [ 93 ]. Carroll v United States, 267 U. S. 132 (1925). [ 94 ]. Id. at 160. [ 95 ]. Id. at 132. [ 96 ]. Id. at 158. [ 97 ]. Id. at 150-53. [ 98 ]. Id. at 153. [ 99 ]. Id. [ 100 ]. Terry, 392 U. S. at 16. 101 ]. Id. at 4-7. [ 102 ]. Terry, 392 U. S. at 2. [ 103 ]. Id. at 16-20. [ 104 ]. Id. at 24. [ 105 ]. U. S. Constitution – Fourth Amendment. [ 106 ]. lectlaw. com. [ 107 ]. Dumbra v. United States, 268 U. S. 435, 439 , 441 (1925). [ 108 ]. Id. at 16. [ 109 ]. Id. [ 110 ]. Id. at 20-27. [ 111 ]. Id. at 20. [ 112 ]. Id. [ 113 ]. United States v Mendenh all, 446 U. S. 544, 545 (1980). [ 114 ]. Id. at 554. [ 115 ]. Id. at 547-49. [ 116 ]. Id. [ 117 ]. Id. at 555. [ 118 ]. Id. [ 119 ]. Id. at 544. [ 120 ]. Id. at 554. [ 121 ]. Pennsylvania v Mimms, 434 U. S. at 106, 98 S. Ct. 330, 54 L. Ed. 2d 331 (1977). [ 122 ]. Id. [ 123 ]. Id. [ 124 ]. Id. [ 125 ]. Id. [ 126 ]. Id. [ 127 ]. Id. [ 128 ]. Id. [ 129 ]. Id at 106, 108. [ 130 ]. Id. [ 131 ]. Id. [ 132 ]. Id. [ 133 ]. Id. [ 134 ]. Id. at 106, 112 (quoting Terry, 392 U. S. , at 21-22). [ 135 ]. Mimms 434, U. S. 106, at 112. [ 136 ]. Id. at 111. [ 137 ]. Id. [ 138 ]. Maryland v Wilson, 519 U. S. 408 (1997). [ 139 ]. Id. [ 140 ]. Id. [ 141 ]. Id. [ 142 ]. Id. [ 143 ]. Id. [ 144 ]. Maryland v Wilson, 519 U. S. , 408 (1997). [ 145 ]. Id. at 414. [ 146 ]. State v Navarro, 34 P. 3d 971 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). [ 147 ]. In re Ilono H. , 113 P. 3d 696 (Ariz Ct. App. 2005). [ 148 ]. Navarro, 34 P. d at 971, 973. [ 149 ]. Id. [ 150 ]. Id. [ 151 ]. Id. [ 152 ]. Id. [ 153 ]. Id. [ 154 ]. Id. at 973-974. [ 155 ]. Id. at 972. [ 156 ]. Id. at 974. [ 157 ]. Id. at 974-975. [ 158 ]. Id. [ 159 ]. Id. [ 160 ]. Ilono H. , 113 P. 3d at 697. [ 161 ]. Id. [ 162 ]. Id. [ 163 ]. Id. [ 164 ]. Id. [ 165 ]. Id. [ 166 ]. Id. [ 167 ]. Id. at 700-701. [ 168 ]. Knowles v Iowa, 52 5 U. S. 113, 117–18 (1998). [ 169 ]. Brendlin v. California, 127 S. Ct. 2400, 2410 (2007). [ 170 ]. Knowles v Iowa, 525 U. S. at 114. [ 171 ]. Idat 113. [ 172 ]. Id. at 118. [ 173 ]. Brendlin, 127 S. Ct. at 2403. [ 174 ]. Id. at 2404. [ 175 ]. Id. [ 176 ]. Id. 177 ]. Id. [ 178 ]. Id. [ 179 ]. Id. [ 180 ]. Id. [ 181 ]. Id. at 2404-05. [ 182 ]. Id. at 2405-06 (quoting Florida v Bostick, 501 U. S. 429, 435-36 (1991)). [ 183 ]. Id. at 2406-07. [ 184 ]. Id. at 2407. [ 185 ]. Id. at 2410. [ 186 ]. Terry, 392 U. S. at 2. [ 187 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 671. [ 188 ]. Brendlin, 551 U. S. at 262. [ 189 ]. Johnson, 170 P. 3d at 671. [ 190 ]. Id. [ 191 ]. Id. at 672. [ 192 ]. Id. [ 193 ]. Id. at 673. [ 194 ]. Id. [ 195 ]. Id. at 674. [ 196 ]. Id. at 674 (Espinosa, J. , dissenting). [ 197 ]. Id. [ 198 ]. Id. (quoting State v Riley, 992 P. 2d 1135, 1140 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999)). [ 199 ]. Id.

Battle of the Coral Sea in World War II

Battle of the Coral Sea in World War II The Battle of the Coral Sea was fought May 4-8, 1942, during World War II (1939-1945) as the Allies sought to halt the Japanese capture of New Guinea. During the opening months of World War in the Pacific, the Japanese won a string of stunning victories which saw them capture Singapore, defeat an Allied fleet in the Java Sea, and force American and Filipino troops on the Bataan Peninsula to surrender. Pushing south through the Dutch East Indies, the Imperial Japanese Naval General Staff had initially desired to mount an invasion of northern Australia to prevent that country from being used as base. This plan was vetoed by the Imperial Japanese Army which lacked the manpower and shipping capability to sustain such an operation. To secure the Japanese southern flank, Vice Admiral Shigeyoshi Inoue, commander of the Fourth Fleet, advocated for taking all of New Guinea and occupying the Solomon Islands. This would eliminate the last Allied base between Japan and Australia as well as would provide a security perimeter around Japans recent conquests in the Dutch East Indies. This plan was approved as it would also bring northern Australia within range of Japanese bombers and would offer jumping off points for operations against Fiji, Samoa, and New Caledonia. The fall of these islands would effectively sever Australias lines of communication with the United States. Japanese Plans Dubbed Operation Mo, the Japanese plan called for three Japanese fleets sortie from Rabaul in April 1942. The first, led by Rear Admiral Kiyohide Shima, was tasked with taking Tulagi in the Solomons and establishing a seaplane base on the island. The next, commanded by Rear Admiral Koso Abe, consisted of the invasion force that would strike the main Allied base on New Guinea, Port Moresby. These invasion forces were screened by Vice Admiral Takeo Takagis covering force centered around the carriers Shokaku and Zuikaku and the light carrier Shoho. Arriving at Tulagi on May 3, Japanese forces quickly occupied the island and set up a seaplane base. Allied Response Throughout the spring of 1942, the Allies remained informed about Operation Mo and Japanese intentions through radio intercepts. This largely occurred as a result of American cryptographers breaking the Japanese JN-25B code. Analysis of the Japanese messages led the Allied leadership to conclude that a major Japanese offensive would occur in the Southwest Pacific during the early weeks of May and that Port Moresby was the likely target. Responding to this threat, Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander-in-Chief of the US Pacific Fleet, ordered all four of his carrier groups to the area. These included Task Forces 17 and 11, centered on the carriers USS Yorktown  (CV-5)  and USS Lexington  (CV-2) respectively, which were already in the South Pacific. Vice Admiral William F. Halseys Task Force 16, with the carriers USS Enterprise (CV-6) and USS Hornet (CV-8), which had just returned to Pearl Harbor from the Doolittle Raid, was also ordered south but would not arrive in time for the battle. Fleets Commanders Allies Rear Admiral Frank J. Fletcher2 carriers, 9 cruisers, 13 destroyers Japanese Vice Admiral Takeo TakagiVice Admiral Shigeyoshi Inoue2 carriers, 1 light carrier, 9 cruisers, 15 destroyers Fighting Begins Led by Rear Admiral Frank J. Fletcher, Yorktown and TF17 raced to the area and launched three strikes against Tulagi on May 4, 1942. Hitting the island hard, they badly damaged the seaplane base and eliminated its reconnaissance capabilities for the coming battle. In addition, Yorktowns aircraft sank a destroyer and five merchant ships. Steaming south, Yorktown joined Lexington later that day. Two days later, land-based B-17s from Australia spotted and attacked the Port Moresby invasion fleet. Bombing from high-altitude, they failed to score any hits. Throughout the day both carrier groups searched for each other with no luck as cloudy skies limited visibility. With night setting in, Fletcher made the difficult decision to detach his main surface force of three cruisers and their escorts. Designated Task Force 44, under the command of Rear Admiral John Crace, Fletcher ordered them to block the probable course of the Port Moresby invasion fleet. Sailing without air cover, Craces ships would be vulnerable to Japanese air strikes. The next day, both carrier groups resumed their searches. Scratch One Flattop While neither found the others main body, they did locate secondary units. This saw Japanese aircraft attack  and sink the destroyer USS Sims as well as cripple the oiler USS Neosho. American aircraft were luckier as they located Shoho.   Caught with most of its aircraft group below decks, the carrier was lightly defended against the combined air groups of the two American carriers. Led by Commander William B. Ault,  Lexingtons aircraft opened the attack shortly after 11:00 AM and scored hits with two bombs and five torpedoes. Burning and nearly stationary,  Shoho  was finished off by  Yorktowns aircraft. The sinking of Shoho led Lieutenant Commander Robert E. Dixon of Lexington  to radio the famous phrase  scratch one flattop.   On May 8, scout planes from each fleet found the enemy around 8:20 AM. As a result, strikes were launched by both sides between 9:15 AM and 9:25 AM. Arriving over Takagis force,  Yorktowns aircraft, led by Lieutenant Commander William O. Burch,  began attacking Shokaku  at 10:57 AM. Hidden in a nearby squall,  Zuikaku  escaped their attention. Hitting Shokaku  with two 1,000 lb. bombs, Burchs men caused severe damage before departing. Reaching the area at 11:30 AM,  Lexingtons planes landed another bomb hit on the crippled carrier. Unable to conduct combat operations, Captain  Takatsugu Jojima  received permission to withdraw his ship from the area.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The Japanese Strike Back While the US pilots were having success, Japanese aircraft were approaching the American carriers.   These were detected by  Lexingtons CXAM-1 radar and F4F Wildcat fighters were directed to intercept.   While some of the enemy aircraft were downed, several commenced runs  on  Yorktown  and  Lexington shortly after 11:00 AM.   Japanese torpedo attacks on the former failed, while the latter sustained two hits by Type 91 torpedoes.   These assaults were followed by dive bombing attacks which scored a hit on  Yorktown  and two on  Lexington.  Damage crews raced to save Lexington and succeeded in restoring the the carrier to operational condition.    As these efforts were concluding, sparks from an electric motor ignited a fire which led to a series of fuel-related explosions. In a short time, the resulting fires became uncontrollable. With the crew unable to extinguish the flames, Captain Frederick C. Sherman ordered Lexington  abandoned. After the crew was evacuated, the destroyer USS  Phelps  fired five torpedoes into the burning carrier to prevent its capture. Blocked in their advance and with Craces force in place, the overall Japanese commander, Vice Admiral Shigeyoshi Inoue, ordered the invasion force to return to port. Aftermath A strategic victory, the Battle of the Coral Sea cost Fletcher the carrier Lexington, as well as the destroyer Sims and the oiler Neosho. Total killed for the Allied forces was 543. For the Japanese, the battle losses included Shoho, one destroyer, and 1,074 killed. In addition, Shokaku was badly damaged and Zuikakus air group greatly reduced. As a result, both would miss the Battle of Midway in early June. While Yorktown was damaged, it was quickly repaired at Pearl Harbor and raced back to sea to aid defeating the Japanese.

Pizza Veloce Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Pizza Veloce - Term Paper Example To provide convenient solutions for ordering and getting different pizzas Products and Services: The main products that will be offered by Pizza Veloce will be the wide variety of pizzas, most which will be based on genuine, Italian recipes that have been used for several centuries. The products will also include side items and other smaller Italian dishes, as well as desserts and drinks that can be served with the foods. The services that will be available by Pizza Veloce will be inclusive of the ways in which the pizza and other food items can be delivered to the home. The first consists of services available online for easy connections and ordering. The second is based on delivery services that are available for those who don’t want to leave their home and are interested in ordering. The third will be in – house services so individuals have the option of a restaurant like atmosphere. Each of these services will be supported by technological structures for fast delive ry and a structure that enhances the making of the pizzas. Organizational Structure: The first part of the structure will be based on different departments and employees that will be able to provide the pizza making services. The first will be a team of employees for making the pizzas. The second will be a team used for the deliveries. There will also be customer service representatives that will be available for the online services and others that will provide in – store services. There will be one manager that overlook all operations at all times, specifically to make sure that there are connections with all deliveries and that workers are effective with the work. The organizational structure will then move into a CEO responsible for overlooking the main components of the operations, a vice president responsible for initiating new developments and a team that overlooks the expansion of the Pizza Veloce. This will consist of an online and offline marketing manager, human resources manager, technology manager and a liaison which will work between the office team and those who are working at the pizza company. Each of the organizational structure components will also consist of supporting technology, specifically which will change the number of employees as well as the needs which are associated with the restaurant. Expected Revenue The expected revenue that comes with the pizza is based on the amount of demand which can grow from the customer expectations. On average, a small pizzeria can expect to make $10,500 to $18,500 per week, if there is continuous demand. However, there are factors to consider with the costs of the pizzeria. For example, the cost of rent is about $8,000 per month. The cost for employees is also an average of $1200 per person per month, with an expected 5 workers per week, which equals $ per month for payment. The technology used as well as the structure is also expected to cost an average of $10,000 to install and $30,000 for yearly maintenance. The profit per year will then be at an average of $180,000 with the expenses averaging $208,000. For the pizzeria to break even, there will need to be three restaurants which open initially, which will increase the profit to $540,000 while maintaining the loss at $544,000. After the second year, the revenue will begin to gain, first by $10,000 because of the installed technology and with the expected increase in profit. There will also be options to expand the chain to continue to gain the profit after

How useful are invertebrate infection models for studying bacterial Assignment

How useful are invertebrate infection models for studying bacterial pathogenisis and therapy - Assignment Example The infection cycle involves the disease causing agent managing entry into the host either through adhesion or penetration, assimilation of nutrients to generate more copies of itself and subvert the defence systems of the host and eventually exit from the host to start another cycle in a different target. Numerous in vitro and in vivo infection models have been developed over the years to identify virulence factors and understand its regulation. The fact that some of the host-pathogen interactions have been evolutionarily conserved has led to the establishment of model systems to understand pathogenesis from both the hosts’ and pathogens’ side. Much remains to be understood about the host-pathogen interaction at the molecular level and model systems that are most informative of this could be systems in which the pathogen and host are both amenable to genetic analysis (Pradel and Ewbank, 2004). A number of non-vertebrate model organisms have been developed in order to study host-pathogen interactions which facilitates not only a better understanding of virulence mechanisms but also permit direct genetic techniques to study host defences while reducing cost and ethical constraints associated with mammalian model systems. Non-vertebrate models have also been more popular in bacterial pathogenesis studies because of the following factors: To understand the complexity of virulence-defence interactions a number of pathogen-host systems are required. Simple easy to handle organism such as D. discoideum, C. elegans, D. melanogaster and G. mellonella helps in identifying virulence factors and understanding their functions. Comparative studies in host models also contribute to the identification of novel elements involved in host susceptibility and resistance. Some of these elements conserved over species may also contribute to our understanding of pathogenesis in vertebrates. The genetic tractability of the simple host models will also make possible refined

Many MNEs may want to start operations in some foreign country Essay Example for Free

Many MNEs may want to start operations in some foreign country Essay Establishment mode means that the MNE starts its operations from scratch in the foreign country usually through a wholly owned subsidiary where as in entry mode; this can be accomplished by a subsidiary or through partnership with a local party which involves shared ownership. In this study the authors examine the effect of same variables on both these choices available to a company. They do it through a series of hypotheses. The first hypothesis measures the positive effect of greater institutional advancement on the choice that the company makes. Institutional advancement is defined in the study as pertaining to changes in formal institutions over a period of time. It is argued that regulatory forces are likely to be a big influence on a decision that an MNE makes with regard to its establishment or entry choice. Regulatory forces or rather Regulative forces as described in the study are not limited to laws and regulations only but also include political and other social factors. The authors conclude that institutional advancement has a positive effect on the choice to establish a subsidiary with shared ownership. The second hypothesis postulated by the authors’ measures the moderating effect of institutional advancement on the tendency of a technologically intense firm to either go for establishment mode or entry mode. It is argued that firms which are technology intense should go for establishment mode because their competitive advantages are embedded in their labor force skills and organizational practices so it is more efficient for them to start from scratch. They should hire and train the local labor force. Furthermore in case of a joint venture or share ownership of the subsidiary, protecting the intellectual rights can be an issue. Protection of such rights is dependent on the judicial system. In transition economics where the judiciary is corrupt and intellectual property rights are not respected, an MNE would be reluctant to transfer its technology. Therefore authors conclude that firm with advanced proprietary technology are likely to prefer establishment mode but level of institutional advancement has a positive moderating effect on such a firm going for entry mode. The third hypothesis measures the moderating effect of institutional advancement on a multidomestic MNE to either go for establishment of entry mode. Multidomestic firms are defined as those which pursue multidomestic strategy and want to establish a sustainable local market presence. For such MNEs acquiring a local company is a more attractive option because such acquisition can provide them with local brands, market knowledge, distribution channels and network relationships with the host country’s other businesses and government. How the restructuring and realignment of the acquired entity can be very challenging. The firms in the host country are likely to be following a different paradigm. But on the other hand if an MNE goes for shared ownership or entry mode, it can accomplish more without facing these difficulties. It is argues that a multidomestic MNE requires lesser control on the subsidiary. If this is so then subsidiaries in the host country can have considerable freedom and operate on their own fully leveraging their local expertise.Hence it is concluded institutional advancement has a positive moderating effect on a multidomestic MNE to go for entry mode. Finally the authors have used an international survey to gather the data to support their findings. The survey consists of a questionnaire with 33 open and close ended questions. Furthermore the MNE’s latest establishment mode choice or entry mode choice has been taken as the dependent variable. Critique This study is no doubt a valuable asset for managers and students alike in studying the behavior of MNEs in making their choices when it comes to Foreign Direct Investment but nevertheless it has a few shortcomings and weaknesses. But the biggest shortcoming of this study is the scope. The authors have primarily taken a sample of European MNEs. And the so called economies in transition are basically east European countries which were once under the iron curtain. Firstly we need to consider the fact that Europeans MNEs may be very different from Japanese or American MNEs and so forth. The establishment or entry mode choice for Japanese firms may be dependent on or moderated by variables other than the ones discussed here. Similarly an MNE whether European or Japanese may decide to invest in some country in Central Asia or North Africa or even South Asia. The market conditions in these countries are very different from those of the transition economies discussed by the authors. This means that the findings in this study are not universally applicable. Nevertheless it is a valuable addition to our knowledge regarding MNE behavior in making Foreign Direct Investment decisions. But for any researcher trying to consult this study, it is very important to keep the above mentioned limitations in mind.

Differing Perspectives of the Caribbean :: Caribbean History Historical Essays

Differing Perspectives of the Caribbean The Caribbean has been an unexplained region throughout the test of time because there are many different depictions of what actually is happening. The ranging cultures in the Caribbean bring about many different points of view. A perfect example is how Cliff, Mintz, and Benitez-Rojo describe their version of the Caribbean. They discuss affairs in the Caribbean from the days of slave trading to present day issues. In analyzing their anecdotes and books, one can find not only similarities between them, but discrepancies as well. All three authors express their thoughts vividly, unleashing ideas about the Caribbean. Among the most important themes of these ideas were that of the plantation, identity, and social hierarchy. The role of the plantation was a prominent issue brought up by all the authors. The plantation played an imperative role in Caribbean society from colonialism to contemporary society. Mintz and Benitez-Rojo gave a number of positive aspects of how plantations were positive in helping the economy whereas Cliff despised the whole plantation system. All authors bring out valid issues on their analysis of plantations. According to Mintz, the emergence of the plantation occurred when there became a decline in miners. This decline brought a new economy and an alternate plan to their mining careers. In addition, it was a new source of production for goods like sugar, rum, coffee and tobacco. Production of goods meant more money to the Caribbean’s economy as well as new materials to give to their colonial powers. Mintz argues that the Caribbean flourished because of the system of plantations. He goes as far as saying, "the plantation system was not only an agricultural device; it also became the basis for an entire societal design" (Mintz, 27). Benitez-Rojo also gives praise to the plantation in his article entitled the Repeating Island. He said how the "modest sugar boom in the Spanish Antilles left an indelible mark on the island’s society" (Benitez-Rojo, 42). The plantations created an economy in the Caribbean when there was previously nothing. It changes the whole course of Caribbean history and this can be incorporated with his Chaos Theory. Benitez-Rojo believes in the physics theory that things in one place certainly have a great effect on something else. However, Cliff significantly differs on her view of the plantation. In Cliff’s Abeng, there is much discussion about the plantation. However, Cliff argues how the sugar plantation actually hurt the economy and made little profits.

Behavioral Implications Of Biological Developmental Changes In The Human Past

Behavioral patterns of the humans are no less influential in its biological development. In fact, one had complemented the other in many ways, and it is a never ending process. It is this process which have manifested in humans the most, after they justified their candidature before natural selection through its various stages of evolution, ranging from bipedalism to the development of language, save the development of brain-size in between.As behavior is found to be mostly species-specific, it speaks of its biological connection; on the other hand, biological development also keeps track of the behavioral changes and adapts to them, all the while environment playing a catalyst between (Descent, 2007). It's like gene-text facilitating the course of behavior and behavior at other times, influenced by the environment, scripting new traits in the gene-text.Some might call humans lucky to find the environment conducive to reach this stage, some would stress on the fact that bipedalism ho lds the key, while some other would stress on the behavior that humans achieved after bipedalism through the development of brain. Thus this essay explores the behavioral implications of biological developmental change, before coming to the conclusion of holding both equally responsible and complementing to each other. Bipedalism Two-legged activities are called bipedalism (bi=two, and pedalism= pedaling acts).It basically covers the four states of movement through a pair of legs, such as standing, walking, running and hopping. It has long evolving history among the vertebrates, ranging from dinosaurs to birds, save the ostrich, who has an estimated speed of 65 km per hour that once matched by the maniraptors, now in the extinct list of dinosaurs (Bipedalism, 2003). However, bipedalism is not a habit of those who have four legs, like the larger section of mammals.However, to match with the uniqueness of nature's diversity, the kangaroos lead in representing the mammals who use biped al movement, through hopping. But it is the humans who provided more variation in their bipedal movements, while the gibbons and giant pangolins prove to be distantly resembling to it. Understandably, bipedalism involves a firm ground beneath the feet; and that takes away the amphibians' scope to earn this scope. More so, it is mostly a reared-up action and barring a few instances of some lizards and cockroaches this action is also unfamiliar in arthropods.Same can be said about the reptilians. With exception being the rule of the nature, two kinds of octopus are seen to resort to bipedal movement at times or some of the animals can be trained to exploit the bipedal movement. , much like the humans who can train themselves to walk on their hands. These are deviations and have no bearing to the mainstream evolution. Bipedalism is considered to be one of the major causes of bringing humans where they are today. The reasons are far too many, as they range from elevation of perception t o the improved condition of survival.Between them lies the factors like utilization of free hands, swimming, faster movement, greater reach, etc. , that speak of several advantages of adapting to the living conditions. This trait has evolved independently, that is, not in a set pattern, having various lineages. As for example, the lizards, the recognized pioneer in bipedalism, have a proven track record of this since 290 million years! Dinosaurs and birds follow closely with their record of 230 million years, much before the groups of extant mammals resorted to bipedalism, mostly evolved independently.However the quest to find the reasons behind this elevation of humans fetch us 12 hypotheses and also points at the fact that the human brain-size could develop only after attaining bipedalism. Brain Development Bipedalism facilitated the humans with a new kind of freedom that they enjoyed with hands, letting them to be more organized in their survival and developmental processes. Howe ver, the gradual manifestation of intelligence in humans has a complex process, and still invites lot of research and observation.Charles Darwin attributed its development in humans as an evolution through the process of natural selection, where humans have become successful in manipulating the brain-body ratio, as well as the development of brain-size for a longer period after birth, rather than other creatures (Creationists, 2007). Overall the situations proved more conducive for the humans to develop their brain-size, like the bipedalism, or front-facing, binocular vision. The work-power of the two hands saved free zone for the brain for them, which led to the exploration of new avenues, thereby increasing the horizons of thinking through more number of activities.Once they adapted to giving birth to their offspring with soft skull that would grow on later, the humans were the decided master of the Earth. The evolution of intelligence always follows a pattern, where, a solution t o a problem takes the solver to another plane, where it faces a new set of problems – upon solving which, it again arrives at another plane to face the similar situation; in the process its thought-processing faculty also fights to gear up for the new challenge, finally succeeding in increasing its ability.Humans, after discovering their new life in the post bipedalism era, when they also had the scope to develop their brain-size in the post-natal period, faced the challenge of securing their offspring, who proved to be totally unfit to survive alone. This situation forced them to remain in groups and explore the ways to enhance the communication among the group members.This state again, commanded for using the brain more than earlier, and responding rightly to that challenge, the humans arrived at a new plain of existence, where they could mastermind their ventures and be joyous with more productivity, with the more secured system for their offspring. The power of interperso nal communication earmarked the new bend in the history of development of humans and finally propelled them to an astoundingly different height from the rest of all other creatures of the earth, with sophisticated set of body and brain complementing each other.Language Faculty The advent of the concept of communication gradually helped humans to shape their behavior, and those acquired traits again worked on their biological evolution apropos their interdependency. As like in its earlier stages where the new solutions fetched new problems which ultimately proved ladder to another developed state of being, the progress of language also had a similar route and is still evolving on with time. It started with signs and sounds and finally followed by the scripture forms, all generated with the intensity to express the ideas bubbling within.The behavioral process at this stage dealt with the urge to create the identity of the individual and the group; another new challenge with the invita tion of reaching another plane of refined existence. They then started identifying various sounds as the representative of various emotions, and needs; with time, these set ideas gave birth to proto-language, which, it could be well-assumed, were influenced and conditioned by the environment, much the way it helped them to achieve bipedalism, and thereafter the larger brain-size.Now it worked on to them find their identity, which generated the races with their certain features distinguishable from one group to another. This tendency of uniqueness gave way to the quest of tracing the uniqueness in an individual greater than ever, and in the process, the started reshaping the language by broadening its base from sound to scriptures, the cuneiforms. These activities also helped to serve the group or the race, helped to maintain the balance in the demand and supply ratio of the resources, it again indicated towards a better state of living with every requisites of it being more organize d and handy (Scientists, 2003).Thus a new avenue of collective living was opened with the cohesion in language. Some also earmark this period as the involuntary manifestation of the desire to form better society or race, a period of precursor of eugenics in the recent times; some attribute this stage as the moment before the giant leap of the civilization. However, concepts apart, there is no doubt that the advent of language among humans helped them to find their ways and means of more comfortable life-style and that attributed further to the evolution of their body that gradually adapted to that newly acquired lifestyle.CONCLUSION The history of the evolution of humans may be counted from the natural selection to the time from when humans started selecting their living conditions. Between these two poles, lie millions of years of graduation or probation period entwined with millions of influencing factors, in which its behavioral patterns and biological developments played stellar roles, both being interdependent and determiner of the development of the other.Likewise, it's the bipedalism facilitating the development of the brain, and then brain's behavior affecting the working pattern of the humans, which in turn influencing the body to adapt to that new working condition, and again that acquired new formation of the body ventures to some new action which is supported by the brain.. this never-ending process of evolution is still on; with body, brain and environment, all the three components achieving new dimensions, nevertheless influencing one another as ever.It can be said, thus, the human past is a fascinating, interactive journey of body and brain (the determiner of behavior), where environment all along served the input for the development of both. In the maze of body-brain communication, any of them can rule over the other, depending on the situation, i. e. , the state of environment, who works on as a stimuli, be in on the mental or on the physical plane. Ends BIBLIOGRAPHY Adaptation by Natural Selection. http://www2. wwnorton. com/college/anthro/bioanth/ch1/welcome. htm. Retrieved on march 28, 2007 Bipedalism http://www. stanford. edu/~harryg/protected/chp15.htm Retrieved on march 28, 2007 â€Å"Creationists Arguments: Brain Sizes† http://www. talkorigins. org/faqs/homs/a_brains. html â€Å"Evolution of Man†, BBC http://www. bbc. co. uk/sn/prehistoric_life/human/human_evolution/index. shtml : Retrieved on march 29, 2007 â€Å"Human evolution†, http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Human_evolution , Retrieved on march 29, 2007 Press release. â€Å"Scientists discover hominid cranium in Ethiopia†.. Indiana University (March 27, 2006). Retrieved on march 30, 2007 â€Å"The Descent of Man† http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/The_Descent_of_Man%2C_and_Selection_in_Relati on_to_Sex Retrieved on march 27, 2007