October 26, 2012
Everest University Online
In each criminal case each party are often battling over what’s relevant meaning evidence tha has a tendency to make a material issue before the court more or less probable as well as reliable which is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of likelihood that it is true and accurate. The last but no less is competent which is any evidence that is relevant and reliable and nor otherwise excludable. The case that I have chosen to talk about is Theodore Robert Bundy, Appellant, vs. State of Florida. Appellee. This case was an appeal by Theodore Robert Bundy from his conviction of first-degree murder and from the trial judge’s imposition of the death sentence after the jury had recommended death. Bundy was sentenced to death after the murder and kidnapping of 12 years old Kimberly Leach on February 9, 1978. All the evidence in this case was relevant, reliable, and competent. The following evidences that lead to Bundy conviction was an eye witnesses that was able to get the license tag number of the van that he had stolen from the Florida State University Media center. The basic facts of the case are that Bundy Kidnapped and murdered a 12 years old girl. The evidence that is relevant, reliable, or competent in this case is the van, eye witnesses, and him being wanted for other similar cases. I think that Bundy got what he deserved in this case. I think that the court’s opinion to sentenced him to death was acceptable, even thou it want by Kimberly Leach back. I do believe that it would gave the family some type of closure.
Theodore Robert Bundy, Appellant, vs. State of Florida, Appellee... (May 9, 1985). Supreme Court of Florida. Retrieved from http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/59128/op-59128.pdf