Criminal Law Foundations Evaluation

Criminal Law Foundations Evaluation

CJA/484 Criminal Justice Administration Capstone

Criminal Law Foundations Evaluation

Team Discussion Question One: What are the Constitutional safeguards provided to individuals by the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments of the United States Constitution? On which areas of criminal justice do each of these amendments has the greatest impact? (Herring, 2014a)

Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from illegal search and seizure. Under these Constitutional rights, a police officer cannot stop or arrest an individual without probable cause or proof of illegal activity or an arrest warrant. Police also cannot search or seize personal property without a search warrant. Any evidence obtained illegally will not be admissible during a criminal trial. This amendment has the most impact in criminal law courts and law enforcement. The fourth amendment is a safeguard against illegal police misconduct by protecting citizens’ right to privacy (FindLaw, 2014).

Fifth Amendment

The Constitutional safeguard that the Fifth Amendment provides to people is that, in the court of law, an individual cannot be trial without a grand jury investigation, double jeopardy, and from self-incrimination. “The 5th Amendment protects people from actions of the federal government” (US History, 2014, para. 3). According to Benoit, “The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation, unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination” (2010, para. 13). The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination by not allowing the court to use a confession or statement when the Miranda warning was not properly formed.

Sixth Amendment

The rights for a criminal defendant to a speedy trial, counsel, a fair jury, and a chance to confront witnesses lay in the Sixth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The amendment represents a critical role in the wide range of rights granted to criminal defendants through the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. The main distinction comes from the amendment’s emblematic, sensible, and rigid value to the adversarial structure of arbitration. The intrinsic importance of the amendment within the framework of the American Criminal Justice System dwells on the fact that it promotes and fosters the normative and functional purpose of according a criminal defendant a trial that is fair. To a great degree, the amendment symbolizes the standard of a system of justice that allocates its citizens and others relevant tools with which to defend oneself against the structured supremacy of the state. The Sixth amendment is meant to even-out the balance of power in criminal procedures by according the defendant an indispensable safeguard against the usual advantage the state or prosecution has in a criminal trial.

Areas where the Amendments have the greatest impact

The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments affect the police, courts and corrections which covers the entire criminal justice system. However, it has the greatest impact on both the police and the courts. Our country’s Due Process of Law and Crime Control Models are constitution-based and stands on principles and values that benefit the entire system and all persons employed within it, as well as society. It protects everyone guaranteeing them certain rights and liberties. This is executed by limiting power to all Criminal justice practitioners and demands that they use this process and follow the procedures of the law when investigating and building cases.

The Constitution of the United States primary purpose is to ensure that offenders are not wrongfully convicted; this affects all areas of the system. This can keep the courts from wasting time and money on innocent individuals. Wrongful convictions have been a very sore area of the Criminal Justice System which allows guilty persons to get away with criminal acts. This impacts the police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, jurors, defendants, and victims.

Since 1989 DNA testing has helped exonerate over 250 people, according to the Innocence Project. In most states, procedural reforms have been adopted to prevent wrongful convictions, including unreliable “snitch” testimony in capital cases and mandatory recording of all homicide confessions (Hoffman, 2011).

The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments of the Unites States Constitution go hand in hand with handling suspects from the point of arrest to conviction or release. The Fourth Amendment provides several protections in reference to security within homes and the protection of personal property as well from unreasonable searches and seizures. This impacts the police and the courts because they must show probable cause in order to execute a warrant or make an arrest.

The Fifth Amendment contains vital protections, and it is the only amendment in which it is mandatory that the police verbally relate to a suspect the right not to speak. This impacts the police and the courts because if it is not effectively done they could lose pertinent evidence. The Sixth Amendment speaks to the guarantees of a speedy trial, trial by jury, notifies the defendants of the charges that are against them cross-examination of all witnesses, the right to have an attorney present and the right to gather witnesses.

Team Discussion Question Two: Select one area of criminal justice. How are the safeguards of Right to Counsel, Miranda Warnings, and the Exclusionary Rule related to the daily operations of that area? (Herring, 2014b)

Right to Counsel

In the area of policing, it is important to understand when each individual’s rights come into play. It is also important that law enforcement officers know when information obtained is illegal and will not be admissible in court. The right to counsel attaches under the Fifth Amendment “only when a person is in arrest-type custody and is to be interrogated by police” (Means, 2003, p. 1). Under the sixth amendment, a person’s right to counsel attaches when a person is formally charged with a crime during arraignment or by a grand jury. Some police may attempt to obtain a waiver of an individual’s Fifth Amendment right to counsel. With no waiver being made while the individual is in custody and has asserted his or her right to counsel, the police is not permitted to continue questioning the individual. According to Means (2003) “Once an in-custody suspect has asserted his Fifth Amendment right to counsel, police are prohibited from all further interrogation efforts on all crimes unless the suspect initiates the communication concerning his criminal involvement or counsel has been made available to the suspect” (p. 1).

Miranda Warning

The safeguards of the Miranda Warning relate to the daily operations of the police by protecting not only individuals who are in custody, but also the police officers. It is a warning which informs suspects in police custody of their right to be silent, it informs them that anything they say can be used against them in a court of law, their right to an attorney, and if they cannot afford one then one will be provided for the individual by the courts. If a police officer does not inform the person of their Miranda Rights before questioning then, the statements that are made may not be used to incriminate the person in a trial. The warning should be recited immediately upon arrest and before interrogation. It is the safeguard of an individual’s constitutional rights.

The Exclusionary Rule

The safeguards of the exclusionary rule prohibit convictions on the root of evidence unlawfully obtained. The tenet eliminates the motivation for law enforcement officers to collect evidence unlawfully. The rights of a defendant subjected to an illegal interrogation or search are not only vindicated by the exclusionary rule, but it also encourages discourages future law enforcement from being careless, thus protecting society. The exclusionary rule also protects the truthfulness, reliability, and consistency of the criminal justice system by checking the government from gaining from wrong-doing of its officers. Authorizing the use of unlawfully obtained proof, the court would indicate an unapproved endorsement of the officers’ techniques in acquiring evidence. The message that would be sent is that it is acceptable for the criminal justice system to violate constitutional rights for a good reason. The elimination of such proof sends a different message-which is that, the government must value rights of the people even while pursuing lawful ends. 

References

Benoit, C. A. (2010). Confessions and the Constitution: The Remedy for Violating Constitutional Safeguards. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/april-2010/confessions-and-the-constitution

FindLaw.(2014). “Search and Seizure” and the Fourth Amendment. Retrieved from http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-rights/search-and-seizure-and-the-fourth-amendment.html

Garcia, A. (1992). The Sixth Amendment in Modern American Jurisprudence: A Critical Perspective. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Herring, J. (2014a). 4.3 Team Discussion Question #1. Retrieved from Unpublished manuscript, University of Phoenix

Herring, J. (2014b). 4.3 Team Discussion Question #2. Retrieved from Unpublished manuscript, University of Phoenix

Hoffmann, J. L., & King, N. J. (2011).Improving criminal justice.Judicature, 95(2), 59-60. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/docview/905914418?accountid=458

Randolph B. Means, “Interrogation Law . . . Reloaded: The Two Rights to Counsel,” Chief’s Counsel, The Police Chief 70 (December 2003): 10–11.

US History.(2014). 10c.Crime and Due Process. Retrieved from http://www.ushistory.org/gov/10c.asp