07:24 Jun 23, 2018 |
English language (monolingual) [PRO] Law/Patents - Law (general) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Charles Davis Spain Local time: 05:38 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
SUMMARY OF ALL EXPLANATIONS PROVIDED | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 +1 | "by" is OK but other changes desirable |
|
"by" is OK but other changes desirable Explanation: You can say that a defendant's rights have been violated by double jeopardy, so I see no reason why you can't say that procedural law was violated by double jeopardy. An alternative might be "on the grounds of double jeopary" or "on double jeopardy grounds", but here I would use "on the grounds of" for the grounds of the decision on appeal, instead of "due to" (see below). "First, he alleges that both his State and Federal Constitutional rights violated by double jeopardy because the robbery offense was a lesser included offense to the felony murder offense." http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/calendar/2017/briefs/f... " Differences in underlying facts are not relevant for determining whether Culp's constitutional rights have been violated by double jeopardy. " https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ms-supreme-court/1157247.html There are a few things in this paragraph I would recommend changing: For "satisfied the appeal" I would put "upheld the appeal". For "concerning Sergey Shanin", it might be better to say "in the case of Sergey Shanin" (assuming it is a case). For "due to", I would suggest "on the grounds of". I think "criminal procedural law" might be preferable to "criminal procedure law". I would be inclined to cut "illegal"; it seems to me redundant. "Double jeopardy" is illegal by definition (at least in most places), and anyway, if it's not illegal there has been no violation of procedural law. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 9 hrs (2018-06-23 17:18:14 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- And I think "overturned the decision" would be more usual in a legal text than "quashed the decision". |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.