Please interpret the forthcoming subject scenario underneath. You obtain be using these grounds balance the instant 7 weeks. The subject heading and cast of subject is listed underneath.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff
Scott Mayo, Defendant
TYPE OF CASE-Criminal
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Scott Mayo compositioned as a bartender at The National Watering Hole. One duskiness at composition, Scott got into an evidence delay Basil Scowen. Mayo becoming Scowen $1500.00. The evidence excited up and, subjoined Scowen excellent up a beer bottle threateningly and appeared to be drunk, Mayo grabbed a pistol kept aback the bar and fired at Scowen, slaying him. Mayo says Scowen told him, “I am going to slay you,” and what he believed was threatening venture from Scowen. Mayo was placed underneathneath stop. He was not interpret his hues. He was transported to the national county jail. The prosecution witnesses are the police administrator, who came to the show and took statements from Mayo, and a continual bar customer, Dawn Dietz, who witnessed some of what happened. The vindication witnesses are the accused, Mayo, and Joe, “the fireman”, who was without and saw some of the possession through the window period sitting on the patio.
Using the grounds granted to you in the subject overhead, retort the forthcoming questions :
1) Did the police own reasonable account to stop Mayo?
2) Did law enforcement disturb Mayo's legal hues? If yes, teach how. If not, teach why.
3) Were the police required to interpret Mayo his Miranda hues? Discuss why.