Criminal Justice Essay

The Government argued the defendants’ Fourth Amendment not violated under the constitutional because the parked vehicle was at a public lot. In some States, the Government has the authority to allow police officers to search a vehicle without the necessity of warrant. “...as long as a state is deciding law based upon its interpretation of its own constitution, the state can be more restrictive than the Supreme Court. However, if the state is interpreting the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution, then they must follow the body of law established by the United States Supreme Court”(Policelink). The Government believes the attachment of the monitoring device for search was a responsible forfeiting act. As well as wiretapping the defendants cellular to help them enforce a predominantly well prepared investigation.

There are three significant issues concerning law enforcement, namely enacting the law, police discretion, and assessment of criminal behavior. Different entities create and enact laws that are specific for the societies those laws represent.

UCR or known as the Uniform crime reports is an annual report published by the FBI in the DOJ, which is meant to estimate most of the major street crimes in the United States.The main purpose of the UCR is basically to collect as many crimes or reliable crimes that come up as crime statistics so it can be used in our law enforcement administration. The Ucr is a very helpful tool for the law. The system was created in 1929. It provided information for criminologists,sociologists, and even the media. The Ucr mostly concentrates on assaults and robberies. The NIBRS or the national incident based reporting system is the system that the government uses for gathering data about recent or past crimes. The system has a lot of purposes but one of the main purposes’ is to evaluate the crimes associated with any current culture of violence theories.

The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.

A case challenging a statute as violating a person's rights under the U. S. Constitution.

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

As a result, every citizen is then forever directly or indirectly affected by the ruling. One such example is the case of the State of Ohio v. Petitioner John W. Terry, who was stopped and searched by an officer after the officer observed the Petitioner seemingly casing a store for a potential robbery. The officer approached the Petitioner for questioning and decided to search him first. (Casebriefs.com). The matter called into question concerns of a possible violation of Mr. Terry’s Fourth Amendment rights.

Judy Madsen and other protesters (the Petitioners) protest abortion clinics run by the Women’s Health Center (the Respondents). The protesters picketed and gave some sidewalk counseling outside the

On November 18, 2011, charges were brought against Antoine Jones for possession of drug trafficking. The case was held by the Supreme Court of the United States, No. 10-1259, Citation 565 U.S 132 s. Ct. 945, 181 L. Ed 2d 911; United States, petitioner v. Antoine Jones. All 9 parties of the Supreme Court were present for the trial as well as the plaintiffs which were the law enforcements along with Deputy Michael R. Dreeben and the defendant Antoine Jones. Each party had a chance to deliberate their opinions and stating their case against Antoine Jones. This case was not only brought into court for Mr. Jones’s cocaine distribution but for authorities violating Antoine Jones Fourth Amendment rights by planting a global positioning system on

The case involved the constitutionality of regulating the length of a police officer’s hair. The regulations banned flared sideburns, beards and required hair to be trimmed and well groomed. The petitioner challenged the regulation. His argument was that the regulations violated his rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth amendment (Yarbrough, 1977).

The evolution of technology demanded changes be made to the traditional rule (Kerr, 2014). Technological advancements led to the formation of a “special” rule formulated to, protect the rights of those arrest possessing cell phones or any type of electronic storage device (Kerr, 2014). With the new ruling came many issues as to whether exceptions apply such as the chimel rule, to those carrying a cell phone (Kerr, 2014). According to the U.S. Supreme Court, warrantless narrow searches are prohibited but invasive searches are not (Kerr, 2014). For example, a warrantless search can be conducted of physical storage devices and a physical item, such as a package of cigarettes (Kerr, 2014). On the other hand, the warrantless search of a cell phone stored in the arrestee’s pocket is not prohibited and considered unconstitutional (Kerr,

Suspect (unknown name), is seeking to suppress drug evidence seized in his residence that could lead to an indictment for trafficking drugs. The warrant to search the house was based on evidence obtained through the installation of a warrantless GPS device to his vehicle. In the case of State v. Johnson 2011-0033, evidence collected through a warrantless GPS led to

Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. They stated that “protecting people from speech they do not want to hear is not a function that the First Amendment allows the government to undertake in the public streets and sidewalks.” For them, the Massachusetts law was in fact aiming to discriminate against opponents of abortion on the basis of content of speech because the statute inhibited patients seeking abortions to so much as hear about McCullen’s anti-abortion views that were at odds with those of the clinic. The second concurring opinion held by Samuel A. Alito Jr. adds that the statute had “blatantly [discriminated] based on viewpoint.” He continued, “critics of the clinic are silenced, while the clinic may authorize its employees to express speech in support of the clinic and its work.” Alito suggested that not only did the Massachusetts law limit McCullen’s speech because of its content, but also favored the clinics point of view over anti-abortion views through the creation of the 35-foot buffer

This paper will describe my understanding of the text and of the lectures provided in the class. Unlike most classes, where I understood only my view of the text, this class was geared so each student would understand each other’s view. 3 An organization is a collective that has some boundary and internal structure that engages in activities related to some complex set of goals. Members of organizations attempt to meet their psychological, ego and emotional needs within the organization. Criminal justice organizations are particularly unique compared to other public or private sector organizations because of the governmental granted authority. Management within these organizations can be defined as the process by

Public criminology takes information, research and education to the next level, as discovered through this essay. It doesn’t just include lab work, research and discoveries, it involves community based teaching in a way that the public can be informed and educated through upfront communication. Throughout this essay, the broad definition of public criminology will be discussed as well as its relevance to society. As with anything, there are challenges and promises that accompany public criminology and those will be stated in this essay. Examples will be given to help you learn the different concepts of public criminology and how it relates to our modern society. Given as a starting point, according to