While in my class I learned a variety of things but the most important topics that stood out to me were the cases. As a class we went over several criminal cases but it were only a few I preferred. One of those cases were Berkemer v. Mccarty. The case originally came out of the U.S District Court for Southern District of Ohio, but later was brought to the Supreme Court. The crime that was charged was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and drugs. An Ohio State Trooper by name of Williams observed McCarty weaving in between lanes. The officer then pulled him over, and the officer asked McCarty If he had been drinking. Honestly, McCarthy stated that he had consumed two beers and marijuana. After the confession he was taken into custody for driving under the influence. Once McCarthy arrived at the jail, he was given an intoxilyzer test and McCarthy passed it. It was also found that the state trooper did not read McCarthy his rights prior to being arrested. The issue that is brought in this case is did the roadside questioning of McCarty be considered custodial interrogation? The court ruled that he did not have to be read his Miranda rights, because of, word of mouth. The Statements McCarthy made prior to his arrest and at the jail was admissible against him.
The next topic I liked in this class was also a case. U.S. v. Salerno was a very interesting case because of the mob ties, so it immediately caught my attention. The crime that was charged , was a 29-count indictment alleging various Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), and wire offenses, extortion, gambling and committed for pretrial detentions. This case is about Anthony Salero and Vincent Cafaro who were arrested in 1986, after being charged ...
... middle of paper ...
... state and federal courts was always a main focus for legal theory. Common Law was always discussed because it was something we would deal with in law enforcement and as regular citizens. Statutory interpretation was another main focus for this class because steps that are taken during the process of law making. My Ethics class was my most hands on class, because it was open for discussion at all times. The class was more about the students and understanding different ethical dilemmas. In the class we learned that ethical issues are common in all aspects of the criminal justice system. The gratuity issue and the death penalty were always discussed. Something very serious like the death penalty is something that is discussed among the legislature and congress. Then you compare the gratuity issue, some think it is just a minor issue, while others believe it is major.
A case in which Officer Michael Slager fell victim to when the courts later changed their verdict after being presented with a video of what really happened. “. if not for bystander Feidin Santana’s video casting doubt on office Michael Slagers version of events, he may not have quickly been charged with murder.” Imagine if this man would have been set free only to think getting away with murder is easy. Seeming that a person is an employee of the law, jurors’ do not expect them to lie.
The news article that I decided to do my assignment on is about a bank manager, Debra Anne Chapin, that embezzled 2 million dollars from a bank. The news article’s title is, “Former manager jailed for cheating bank out of $2M; Woman used cash to pay bills, gamble and feed her cocaine habit.” The crime took place in Calgary between June 1, 2006 and June, 30 2008. This embezzlement is a classic case of white collar crime and demonstrates numerous criminological theories.
The Supreme Court ruled that due to the coercive nature of the custodial interrogation by police, no confession could be admissible under the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination Clause and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney unless a suspect has been made aware to his rights and the suspect had then waived them
Whitley, Kyles was tried for murder, convicted and sentenced to death. However, upon review of his case, it was discovered that the prosecution had failed to give evidence about a witness, a man named “Beanie”, and several other pieces of material evidence. Since these were not given to the defense and the evidence was significant, he was given a new trial (United states v., 1976). What separates this case from the others is the fact that the evidence suppressed was witness testimony and the witness’ background and prior statements. The testimony of “Beanie” in this case was important, as it had “significant inconsistencies and affirmatively self-incriminating assertions (Kyles v. whitley, 1995)”. Because this information and prior testimony relevant to the case weren’t released, the conviction was overturned. This is relevant to the dilemma because one of the areas that had importance to the defense was that the witness wasn’t consistent in their testimony and that led to issues with their effectiveness as a witness. Referring back to the dilemma and the officer’s conduct, the officer wasn’t consistent in their testimony, namely that they denied wrongdoing and later confessed. This shows that the officer is an inconsistent witness and that if this is discovered, and the prosecution must disclose that information, he can be impeached as a witness. This will mean that he is not as effective in the criminal justice
The American criminal justice system decided differently in the similar circumstances. The courts endorce the police, detectives and prosecutor’s methods to take confession from defendants during the interrogation at law enforcement agencies office. It was viewed alright for the detectives to use psychological intimidation methods to get confession from the defendants in interrogation rooms. And the courts did not see as if there were any deprivation of defendants rights. During the appeals the courts decided that defendant was informed of his rights and he was willingly and awarely confessing the guilty of crime. 3)The rendering of this decision had constitutional implications in which other Supreme court cases would try to use Miranda rights as precedence or oppose the
The case of Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 [1966]) is one of the most important cases in history. It brought about prominent rights that are still existent today in 2015 regarding interrogations and custody. The results of this case are still seen in the current criminal justice system. However, even though the rights that were given to the system by the court, there are still instances today in which these Miranda rights are violated. The concept of Miranda has evolved a lot from a court case to a code used by law enforcement during custodies and investigations.
To show an unbiased and educated examination of the five cases involving questionable interrogations, I will give information on the crime that occurred, the problems with the interrogations and other evidence, who is at fault for problems within the case, how the defendant was cleared (if he was), and the compensation and future changes that were a direct response to these cases provided that they occurred or are in the process of occurring. The five cases that I will examine involve the accused: George Allen, Hunter Johnson, Peter Reilly, Michael Crowe, and Reggie Clemons. Each case is significantly different yet showcases many acts of injustice within the justice system.
Many of the traditional criminological theories focused more on biological, psychological and sociological explanations of crime rather than on the cost and benefits of crime. More conservative approaches, including routine actives, lifestyle exposure and opportunity theories have clearly incorporated crime rate patterns as a fundamental part of analyzing the economics of crime. Crime statistics are important for the simple reason that they help put theories into a logical perspective. For example, a prospective home owner may want to look at crime rates in areas of potential occupancy. On a more complex level, it helps law enforcement and legislators create effective crime reduction programs. Furthermore, it also helps these agencies determine if crime prevention programs, that have been in effect, have been successful. There are many factors that influence the rates of crime including socio economic status, geographical location, culture and other lifestyle factors. More specifically, Messner and Blau (1987) used routine activities theory to test the relationship between the indicators of leisure activities and the rate of serious crimes. They discussed two types of leisure actives, the first being a household pastime, which primarily focused on television watching. The second type was a non-household leisure event which was consisted of attendance to sporting events, cinemas, and entertainment districts. The focus of this paper will be to study the effects that substantial amounts of leisure activities have on the offender and the victim. Leisure activities not only make a crime more opportunistic for offenders, it may also provide offenders with motivation to engage in criminal activity. On the other hand, it may also be argue...
Early English law had many influences on law enforcement in the United States of American during the 1600s-1800s. The riot act of 1714 which was an act of Parliament for Great Britain where the local authorities in that community would choose a group of people to keep order and call the military if a fight or riot got out of hand. “The government had no civil police force to deal with mob violence therefore the government had to call in the military using the riot act to control the situation.’ (Hess, 2013; p. 10). As the law enforcement evolved urbanization turned into commerce and industry. Meanwhile in the early system of the law the watch and ward system but eventually seemed to be non-effective.
Gaining an in-depth knowledge of the criminal justice system, throughout my Bachelors program has been exciting as much as an eye opener. Some of the subjects were ones that I did not expect. There were also, ones that had no idea how ignorant I was on the subject.
Schmalleleger, F. (2002). Criminal Law Today: An Introduction with capstone cases. (2nd edition) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
I wanted to look at the investigative and criminal procedures following the arrest of an alleged criminal and the powerful effects via testimonies and evidence (or lack thereof) it can have on a case.There is an importance of the courts in regards to crime that can’t be over looked. The primary function of the criminal justice system is to uphold the established laws, which define what we understand as deviant in this society.
...’ testimony at trial. This rule has played a big role in the American system like in the case of Mapp V. Ohio. Ohio police officers had gone to a home of a women to ask her question about a recent bombing and requested to search her house. When she denied them access, they arrested her and searched her house which led them to find allegedly obscene books, pictures, and photographs.
In the beginning of the semester when we were handed this trial without knowing this was the one we would be viewing in class, I noticed that my initial verdict from then was drastically different than my final verdict after watching the trial. After viewing the trial I realized that the details and evidence that was presented in the article we were given was one sided to favor the prosecutors. I believe that it is important for me to discuss my view of this trial, my verdict and my reasoning for why I believe in my decision.
Criminology is the scientific study of why people commit crime and why they act the way they do. The origins of criminology are usually placed in the eighteenth to the mid- nineteenth century. This was also a point of scientific discoveries and the creation of the new scholarly field of studies. One of these was criminology. Criminology was an act against the wild system of law, punishment, and justice that existed before the French revolution. (Adler, Mueller, Laufer & Grekul, 2012). There are many criminology theories that explain why an individual commit a crime. Anomie/stain theory and labelling theory are two important theories in criminology. There are two different kinds of theories, psychological theories and biological theories. Both of those theories share the assumption that such behaviour is caused by some underlying physical or mental condition that separates the criminal from the non-criminal. They seek to identify the kind of person who becomes a criminal and to find the factors that caused the person to engage in criminal behavior. (Adler et al.,).