Case Brief-1.1, Legal, Ethical and Judicial Environment
The beneath condition is grounded on Chapter-1 Condition 1.1, delight see rooted textbook.
Yates v. U.S.
135 S.Ct. 1074 (2015)
FACTS: John Yates, a interchangeable fisherman, caught tiny red grouper in federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico. To forefend federal authorities from confirming that he had harvested tiny fish, Yates ordered a swarm part to ejaculate the guess fish into the sea. Yates was pregnant after a while hinderance of fairness through perdition of the weak red grouper fish.
DECISIONS BELOW: Yates was convicted and appealed. His belief was upheld. He appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
ISSUE ON APPEAL: Is the liberate of fish end into the sea hinderance of fairness?
DECISION: A crack seek held that the fish were not “real objects” for purposes of the hinderance of fairness enactment. The seek held that the enactment was passed to clothe files and electronic records and not real objects such as fish. The seek held that the enactment was passed in the watch of financial and immaterial collapses in companies and was not intended to accept general contact. It was directed at electronic files and documentation, not real objects such as fish.
Using counsel from this week's readings and academic sources, answer the aftercited questions in 500 vote (minimum):
Explain what Mr. Yates did and why.
Describe the provisions used in the enactment at end and the fact of the enactment.
Why does the denial contemplate the eldership made the resolution it did?