Marc Chagalls I and the Village

The piece I have chosen for this assignment is Marc Chagalls I and the Village. This piece, done in oil paints seems to have taken on many of the characteristics of watercolors. Many of the colors are very translucent, and many bleed into each other. The subjects in this piece are very defined. However, I am unsure what point the artist is trying to make. The contrasting colors of green and red, along with blue and orange create movement, and keep your eye from staying in one place for very long. The ultimate effect of the whole piece is very tranquil and peaceful. There are no sharp points or angles, which helps create the effect of softness and calmness. In this painting, I feel that color is the predominant feature. I feel that the use of color in this work is very similar to the work of the Fauves in that it is liberally applied. Chagalls painting captures several scenes, occurring at the same time. These scenes being a women milking a cow, an man with a grass or hay cutting tool, and another man starring into the eyes of a cow. These subject matters really give you a sense of the past, and make the work quite nostalgic. I feel that there can be many reasons as to why Chagall chose to paint the subjects he painted. However, he feels quite differently, as shown in the following quote where he describes his work. I dont understand them at all. They are only pictorial arrangements of images that obsess me...The theories I would make up to explain myself and those which others elaborate in connection with my work are nonsense... My paintings are my reason for existence, my life, and thats all. I feel that Chagall chose the subjects of his past times because of everything that was going on in the world, while he was painting. This work was done in the beginning of a new century, of which had drastic changes in the everyday lives of many people due to new developments in technology

The Pre-Trial Motions Stage of a Criminal Case

The Pre-Trial Motions Stage of a Criminal Case After it is decided that a criminal case will proceed to trial, pre-trial motions can be presented to the court that can influence how the trial is conducted. Those motions can address many different topics and issues. Pre-trial motions can address the evidence to be presented at the trial, the witnesses who will testify and even the type of defense the defendant can present. For example, if a defendant plans to plead not guilty by reason of insanity, a pre-trial motion must be made to the court and a hearing conducted to determine if that defense will be allowed. The same is true if the defendant pleads guilty but mentally ill. Each pre-trial motion can prompt a mini-trial before the judge in which witnesses can be presented. Most pre-trial motion hearings consist of the prosecution and defense making oral arguments to support their case, along with written arguments citing case law precedents. In pre-trial motions, the judge makes the final decision. There is no jury present. For each side, depending on how the judge rules, that ruling can be the basis for a future appeal. The defense can argue that the judge made an error in the ruling, affecting the outcome of the eventual trial. Pre-trial motions can address a broad range of issues. Some common ones include: Motion to Dismiss An attempt to get a judge to dismiss a charge or the entire case. If may be used when there is not enough evidence or when the evidence or facts in the case do not equal a crime. It is also filed when the court does not have the authority or jurisdiction to make a ruling in the case. For example, if a will is being contested, the case would have to be decided by a probate court and not a small claims court. A motion to dismiss the case based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction would likely be filed. Motion for Change of Venue Most often a request for a change of venue of the trial is due to pre-trial publicity. Famous Cases When Changes of Venue were Granted The four Los Angeles police officers charged with assault of Rodney King in 1991, had their trial moved from  Los Angeles County to  Ventura County.Oklahoma City Bomber Timothy McVeigh was granted a change of venue  from Oklahoma to the U.S. District Court in Denver, Colorado.Beltway snipers Lee Boyd Malvo and John Allen Muhammad had their trials moved from northern Virginia to Chesapeake and Virginia Beach, in southeastern Virginia. Motion to Suppress Evidence Used to keep certain statements or evidence from being introduced as evidence. Seasoned judges will not admit any statement or evidence into evidence that could serve as a basis for a reversal of a conviction. A motion to suppress evidence often addresses issues such as Evidence seized illegally.Confessions wrongly obtained.Statements improperly obtained.If there was probable cause to make an arrest. For example, if police conducted a search without probable cause (in violation of the Fourth Amendment), an attempt to suppress the evidence found as a result of that search might be granted. The Casey Anthony Case; Motion to Suppress Evidence Casey Anthony was found not guilty of first-degree murder, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter of her child, Caylee Anthony. Judge Belvin Perry denied Anthonys defense attorneys motions to suppress statements made by Anthony to George, Cindy, and Lee Anthony, pen pal Robyn Adams and corrections officer Sylvia Hernandez. The judge also denied the defenses motion to suppress statements Anthony made to law enforcement because she had not been read her Miranda Rights. The judge agreed with prosecutors that at the time of the statements, Anthony was not a suspect. Although the defense motions to suppress evidence were denied, Anthony was found not guilty. However, had she been found guilty, the denial to suppress evidence could have been used in the appeals process to reverse the conviction. Other Examples of Pre-Trial Motions To challenge the search warrant issued in the case.To exclude some evidence gathered during the search.To exclude statements made by the defendant to investigators.To determine if expert witnesses can testify.To challenge expert testimony.To request a gag order in the case.