Court Case Study: Delong Vs. Erie County

Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can

The Plaintiff, Keller, sued the defendant, DeLong. DeLong was driving Kellers car at Tyngsboro, Massachusetts at approximately 11:40p.m. on April 14, 1963, DeLong collided with a utility pole at the side of the highway. The Trial Court ruled that the sole cause of the accident was the fact that the defendant dozed off to sleep and did not awaken in time to avoid collision with the pole. The driver showed no sign he was going to fall asleep. Defendant, Carl DeLong, suddenly and unexpectedly dozed at the time of the occurrence of the accident. Defendant, DeLong, was not found negligent. Vacated; reversed, affirming trial court’s judgment.

MILLERSBURG — A local man who admittedly filmed coworkers using an employee bathroom now faces the potential of local jail time.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the nation and is responsible for being the impartial judge in interpreting the law of the land. One of the biggest struggles the Court can face is having to rule for what is constitutional over what is morally right. This is not referring to Plessy v. Ferguson where we only know it was morally wrong in hindsight. This is referring to a case where the judges knew fully well that what had happened was a tragedy and an injustice yet, they had to rule against what any normal human being would vote for. Imagine the difficulty in that. Now, imagine the public backlash when it was announced. The conflict of morality vs. constitutionality in the Court in the case of DeShaney v Winnebago County is apparent

In the case New Jersey v. T.L.O., the student’s purse was searched after the principal had reasonable suspicion that she had cigarettes in her purse since she was caught smoking in the bathroom. The court decision in this case concluded that teachers are acting as agents for the state and are therefore allowed to search if they have reasonable suspicion. Students do have the Fourth Amendment right as all people in America have. However, student’s expectation of privacy has to be balanced with the needs of the school to maintain the educational environment. Schools do not have to obtain a warrant to search, but must have reasonable suspicion in order to search a student’s person or property.

Introduction Of Case: New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) is a court case heard and ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States. The case dealt with the constitutionality of the search of a public school student after she had gotten caught smoking in a public school bathroom. The search provided evidence of drug paraphernalia, marijuana, and the intent of sale of drugs. The student fought the charges, stating that the search violated her Fourth Amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court ruled 6-3, that the search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

The case of New Jersey vs T.L.O was a resultant case of a search conducted by the then assistant vice principal- Theodore Choplick at Piscataway township high school with two freshmen girls -T.L.O inclusive, after a teacher had caught them smoking cigarettes in the bathroom. The first girl had admitted to the offense, however, T.L.O denied this. This prompted Theodore to demand to search her purse where he found implicating evidence. In short, she was expelled and fined for 1000 USD. This led to a court case with an intent on proving that the school had violated the Fourth Amendment since the school was a Governmental organization. The Fourth Amendment states that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,

Please list the evidence submitted for each task. Indicate the page numbers where the evidence can be found or describe the nature of the evidence (e.g. video,

Board of County Commissioners of Brevard V. Snyder set a precedent since the Court concluded the comprehensive plan, provides for future land use through gradual and ordered growth, and it is not a literal guide. Thus, Local governments have the discretion to decide that certain land uses should be denied, even if they comply with comprehensive plan guidelines.

It is the government’s ordained and foremost right to provide its citizens with reliable protection and security, especially in the face of an emergency. However, the government’s failure to provide equitable care, causing damage, injury, or death, results in legal negligence, or a person not acting to their given standard resulting in damage. In the case of Riss v. The City of New York, Linda Riss experienced negligent conduct from the New York City police department when, after she was repeatedly threatened by a rejected suitor, they did nothing to protect her until after she was mutilated with acid. With protection and ongoing investigation, Riss would have been kept safe under the responsibility that the police failed to adhere to.

In this paper, I will be writing about Police Discretion. I will start by defining Police Discretion then briefly discuss the use in domestic disturbances, minor misdemeanors, and traffic enforcement. I will also discuss the application of police discretion, the provisions it uses and how it is currently practiced. At the end of these brief descriptions, I will then present the myth that exists in regards to police discretion. And finally, I will end this paper with my personal opinion as well as a brief conclusion.

2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.

Numerous police agency’s and police officials work on a distinctive local, state, and federal level and role. It has its individual area, sectors, and function, and work according to local streets parts inside policing. In order for any local, state, and federal police division to work successfully it must hire chiefs, deputy’s, and sheriffs who retain leadership and who uses creative thinking skills to teach comprehensive, and aggressive instruction to make the police division a tougher department by holding all its workers tasks for doing his or her job according to its agency’s guidelines and procedures known as code of conduct. “Municipal police work for municipalities such as towns or cities, county police and deputy sheriffs work for counties, state police work for states, and federal police work for the federal government. Some have the same duties as one another or very similar duties, and some have different or additional duties. Their jurisdiction is sometimes the main difference. For example, a municipal police officer normally has primary

With the legitimate use of force and the confrontational nature of their interaction of community, the police work offers opportunity to officers to abuse their authority when their authority is perceived as being threatened. For example, police have to be suspicious even in regular duties like patrolling the district. They remain suspicious to everyone in the street. Most of the time, police officers work on their own without much monitoring, for instance, no one guide them when they patrol, when they face challenges from the public, they have to make the decision on their own of whether respond to the challenge by abusing their authority. It is the vagueness of their work train the police to be suspicious to any minor change in the surrounding environment in order to maintain the social order. The ambiguities also offer room for them to make choice as well as the possibility of corruption.

This paper will describe police power and police authority. I will also talk about police discretion as for as whom gets locked up and who is allowed to go free. This paper will discuss the different use of police force. In this paper I will also talk about police attitude, police misconduct, and physical abuse among police officers.