More handpicked essays just for you.
History of the american corrections system
History of the american corrections system
History of the american corrections system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History of the american corrections system
The amendments Bail Clause was a result of injustices in England, where the judges abused their power in determining bail. There were a number of attempts to reform the law, but the English Bill of Rights in 1689 outlawed excessive bail. But it did not specify which offenses should or should not qualify as bailable. In 1987 the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment bail clause had only one meaning. That bail conditions when compared with the magnitude of crime, should not be excessive (). The first case to see this excessive bail clause was United States vs. Bajakajian in 1998. This case was one were more than $10,000 U.S currency was taken out of the country without reporting it as law required. As a result the fin was
.... Madison was applied to this decision because the actions committed were unconstitutional. According to the Supreme Court the 8th Amendment was broken because the District Court of Appeal was giving a cruel and unusual punishment to Graham. The 8th amendment claus does not allow a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in jail without a parole for a non-homicidal crime. Therefore Terrance could not fall through with this punishment.
In the political world today there are so many different opinions about several different topics. The topics that I will address to you will be, should the 22nd Amendment be repealed and also should the foreign born be allowed to run for president. In both topics you may have your pros and cons, but I am strongly against the both of them because I feel that the Constitution should not be taken advantage of. Government should not be allowed to manipulate the Constitution to suit his or her needs. While making adjustments to the Constitution to allow different things to take place for convenience doesn’t leave any form respect of the Constitution. There should be a line drawn to keep this from happening for years to come on these issues and others as well. Some will like for the 22nd amendment to repealed to keep who they like in office, but my feeling towards this is give other the opportunity to make our world a better place. There are more than enough qualified people to make a difference for our country no need to stick to one person who eventually will get tired of it anyway. In addition, with the foreign born, this issue came to play all over Schwarzenegger getting backed up by Congress and other governors in California to try to make necessary changes to the Constitution (CNN News, 2004).
The eighth amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. New Cutting edge technology carries with it the likelihood of new treatment for criminals. A fictional example of such technology is Ludovico treatment, which alters the consciousness of a criminal and makes them non-violent. The use of the Ludovico treatment on prisoners can be considered a cruel and unusual punishment and thus violate the eighth amendment. Even though this treatment may be technically unconstitutional, it would be allowed in the United States for the betterment of society.
The Eighth Amendment states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The Eighth Amendment has two specific “elements” which define an individual’s actual rights retaining to the Eighth Amendment. The first “element,” “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed” states that fines or bail should not be overly unobtainable or imposed on an individual. The second “element” of the Eighth Amendment, “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” states that cruel or unusual punishment will not be inflicted.
Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government.
In this paper I’m going to discuss what is the 6th amendment right, the elements of ineffective counsel, how judges deem a person as ineffective counsel from an effective counsel, cases where defendants believed their counsel was ineffective and judges ruled them effective. I will also start by defining what is the 6th amendment right and stating the elements of an ineffective counsel. The 6th amendment is the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury if the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause if the accusation; to be confronted with the witness against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense (U.S. Constitution). There were two elements to ineffective assistance of counsel: a defendant must prove that his or her trial attorney/ lawyer performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors the results of the proceeding would have been different (Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 1984).
To this day, Americans have many rights and privileges. Rights stated in the United States constitution may be simple and to the point, but the rights Americans have may cause debate to whether or not something that happens in society, is completely reasonable. The Texas v. Johnson case created much debate due to a burning of the American Flag. One may say the burning of the flag was tolerable because of the rights citizens of the United States have, another may say it was not acceptable due to what the American flag symbolizes for America. (Brennan and Stevens 1). Johnson was outside of his First Amendment rights, and the burning of the American flag was unjust due to what the flag means to America.
The amendment that raises my own eye is the Search and Seizures Clause of the Fourth Amendment. Like most of the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment has its origins in 17th and 18th century, English common law. Unlike the rest of the Bill of Rights, the Fourth Amendment's origins can be traced precisely it arose out of a strong public reaction to three cases from the 1760s, two decided in England and one in the colonies. Two cases from England, “Entick vs. Carrington” and “Wilkes vs. Wood”, involved plaintiffs who produced pamphlets criticizing the government. During the arresting, officials seized books and papers from the plaintiff’s property. A court agreed that the officers’ actions constituted trespassing. The third case occurred within the colonies and involved “writs of assistance,” which permitted officials to search for smuggled goods without specify which house or what goods.
The Fourth Amendment came almost directly from experience of the colonials. But it wasn’t introduced only as a fundamental right, but also as a major part of the English ideals as well. In England, ''Everyman's house is his castle'' was an honored phrase, enforcing the idea that it is not only is it a law, but a right that cannot be delegated by any government idea. There are two major cases where this idea was tried. Semayne’s Case and Entick v. Carrington.
The extents of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been long discussed since its adoption in mid-late 1800s. Deciding cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade has been possible due to mentioned amendment. These past cases not only show the progression of American society, but also highlights the degree of versatility that is contained within the amendment. Now, in 2015, the concerns are not of racial segregation or abortion, the extent of the amendment was brought to a new field: same-sex marriage. In Obergefell v Hodges, we can see the epitome of the Equal Protection Clause.
Is the death penalty consistent with the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against the imposition of cruel and unusual punishments? This essay will address this question and present a short history of the death penalty in America.
Miranda v. Arizona is a case that revolutionized the rights of an accused while in custody and interrogation. The Supreme court leaders based the rights of Mr. Miranda by the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution. The fifth amendment has been interpreted though the decision of supreme court rulings into the right to remain silent in an interrogation in order to prevent the accused to testify against himself. This amendment also protects any person from double jeopardy from the same crime, gives him or her a grand jury, and it requires for due process of law to come in effect in case a citizen is denied him or her from their right of life, liberty, or property.
Amendment 8: Punishment will fit the crime, fair fines, no excessive bails, nor cruel and unusual
The procedure known as “parole” in the criminal justice system has been in practice in the United States since the late 1800’s when it was begun in a reformatory in Elmira, New York. It’s process provides for early conditional release from prison for convicted felons, after part of their prison sentence has been served, and they are found to be eligible for parole based on factors such as: conduct while incarcerated, rehabilitative efforts/progress, type of offense, and remorse for their crime. Its use has been expanded to many states, and today has become the primary way by which offenders are released from prisons and correctional institutions. Unfortunately, parole is not always rewarded to worthy inmates, thus putting society at risk for repeated crimes that often outweigh the benefits of parole, therefore, parole should be abolished and inmates should be made to complete their full sentences. Prison inmates are usually sentenced by the severity of their crimes, as well as their mental intention at the time of the act. For example: a person who commits murder intentionally expects to take the life of another in reckless disregard for human life, and knows that the act itself which he or she has decided to commit, will surely bring about death. However, in the case of manslaughter, which is also the taking of a human life, there is no actual intention to bring about death. The act that lead to someone’s death, is measured by the circumstances that made the person kill such as self-defense, or a crime of passion because the killer was provoked in such a way that a chain of events lead to violence which eventually resulted in peril. Because of the difference in how these crimes are carried out, inmates are sentenced differently; some are sentenced to life in prison, and others are sentenced to several years and will be eligible for parole after serving part of their sentence. In lieu of inmates completing their full sentences, parole tries to achieve releasing inmates early based on the idea that the inmate has been sufficiently punished, and should be given the opportunity to become a law abiding citizen, capable of functioning in our society with adequate supervision. Although parole attempts to carefully screen inmates prior to granting early release, their decisions often do not merit wise choices. As a social worker, I e...
The Eighth Amendment states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (Eighth Amendment, pp. 1467). The Fourteenth Amendment states” No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (Fourteenth Amendment,