Exam 2 Study Guide
Exam 2 Study Guide CRJU110
Popular in intro to criminal justice
Popular in Criminal Justice
This 19 page Study Guide was uploaded by Rachel Mendelowitz on Saturday October 17, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to CRJU110 at University of Delaware taught by Emma Jean Joseph in Spring 2014. Since its upload, it has received 34 views. For similar materials see intro to criminal justice in Criminal Justice at University of Delaware.
Reviews for Exam 2 Study Guide
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/17/15
Criminal Justice Exam 2 I 4th Amendment Prohibition of Unreasonable Searches and Seizures a Governing Principle Reasonableness b Balancing Test i Importance of Governmental Interests ii Importance of Individual Liberty Interest 1 Need to balance government vs individual interest iii Level of Intrusion into Liberty Interest 1 Greater intrusion greaterjustification and suspicion necessary iv Effectiveness of Governmental action small part of the equation c Reasonable Expectation of Privacy i 4th amendment does not apply if there s no reasonable expectation of pdvacy ii Payton vs New York 1 Court says it is a person s home where an individual has the greatest expectation of privacy iii California vs Greenwood trash bag case 1 Police take trash Greenwood put on the curb nd evidence he was selling drugs then got a search warrant 2 Question did officer need warrant to search bags left outside his yard that were left to go to the dump 3 Supreme court said they DIDN T need a warrant in order to have privacy under 4 must have reasonable expectation of privacy in that area which Greenwood didn t have because of a Location Curtilage beyond yard b Abandon knew he wouldn t see it again c Exposure he exposed his trash to the public d Arrest Probable Cause i Arrest seizure of person ii Probable Cause substantial trustworthy info that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that evidence of a crime will be found belief that law was being violated on the premises to be searched e Stop Reasonable Suspicion i Stop limited detention of a person to investigate also seizure f Sobriety Checkpoint No Individualized Suspicion Required also seizure g General Rule Arrest Warrants Not Required h General Rule Search Warrants Are Required ll Seizures of the Person 4th Amendment a De nition of Seizure i Apprehension through the use of physical force OR submission to a show of authority 1 California vs Hodari D a Hodari ran away from cops officer sees him throw coke to the ground b Officer arrests Hodari then goes to pick up coke from ground The only thing the of cer knew about Hodari was that he ran away from the police Argument by Hodari s attorney just because he ran by seeing police does not measure reasonable suspicion for stop l initial seizure of Hodari was unreasonable so everything that happened after was illegal Supreme Court de ned seizure getting control by one of two ways i Physical apprehension ii A show of authority PLUS suspect submits to show of author y Prosecutor s response you are correct with regard to your argument that there wasn t reasonable suspicion for stop initial seizure of Hodari was invalid l since they agreed there was no issue in the case and can t be addressed by the court it s a given But he goes on to say that even though the seizure was illegal it didn t take place until he was tackled and at that point he didn t have the crack so it was not a product of the illegal seizure When the seizure occurred is key to whether or not the evidence is valid Seizure didn t take place until he was tackled because he didn t submit to the of cer by this time he had seen the crack and that was his probable cause The second seizure arrest was valid because of the crack CRACK WAS admissible Court said in footnote that prosecutors shouldn t concede to the point they should argue it because they probably would have won court agreed seizure was legal to begin with 2 Illinois vs Wardlow a After 9 years another case comes up that brings up question of whether immediate ight from police is enough to constitute reasonable suspicion for a stop Guy sees cops coming and runs of cers catch him nd he is a convicted felon with a gun Wardlow argued initial stop was invalid l there wasn t reasonable suspicion immediate ight from police is NOT enough State of Illinois argued that immediate ight from police is enough for reasonable suspicion i Per Se Rule if one factor is all you need for reasonable suspicion US supreme court said NO did NOT establish Per Se Rule argued by Illinois Totality of the Circumstances approach l need to look at all of the circumstances to make the determination if there was reasonable suspicion for stop no one factor by itself is enough to establish reasonable suspicion g In this speci c case they said there was reasonable suspicion because of immediate ight in high crime area h Same situation that happened in Hodari D l had court been able to address whether or not the seizure was legal it would have ruled yes ii Apprehension through the use of deadly force 1 Tennessee vs Garner a Deadly force against a eeing felon is proper only when it is necessary to prevent the escape and when the of cers have probable cause to believe the suspect poses a signi cant threat of death or serious physical injury to the of cer or others b Arrests i Arrest Warrants 1 Requirements a Probable cause b Speci city warrant must be speci c i Arrest individual to be arrested and offense for which person is being arrested ii Search m to be searched for amp places to be searched c Issuance by a Neutral Magistrate 2 General Rule l if of cer is going to arrest suspect in their own home arrest warrant IS required iudge s assessment of probable cause 3 Exception l Comes from Payton vs New York a If there is an exigent circumstance emergency you DON T need a warrant to arrest in someone s home i Hot Pursuit suspect is being chased and runs into his house ii Suspect poses a danger to someone in the house iii Probable cause that suspect is about to destroy evidence ii Warrantless Arrests 1 Arrest is reasonable as long as its based upon probable cause based on police of cer s assessment c Stops i Stops of Individuals on the Street 1 Terry vs Ohio a Stop amp Frisk case b Court allowed seizure of the person on the basis of something less than probable cause ii Spot Checks of Automobiles 1 Delaware vs Prouse a There was a law in place to stop cars at random to check license amp registration b Cop pulls over Prouse smells pot searches car amp nds it Prouse arrested c Argument stop was illegal so search was illegal d Question are routine random car stops reasonable within 4th e Supreme court rules they are NOT f Gives greater protection to individuals d Sobriety Checkpoints Drug Checkpoints i Michigan Dept of State Police vs Sitz 1 Pattern for checking cars no individualized suspicion 2 Reason they do this traf c safety 3 It s a minimial seizure a Minimal intrusion but HUGE governmental interest of getting drunk drivers off the road 4 This case 2 of 126 drivers were arrested relative effectiveness 5 Court says it was relatively effective but its not up to the court to decide the best means of keeping roads safe legislatures need to do that 6 Court says sobriety tests are reasonable ii City of Indianapolis vs Edmond lll Searches a Search warrants i Requirements 1 Valid at lnception l officer must have been justi ed in beginning the search 2 Valid in Scope l officer must stay within permissible boundaries ii General Rule l warrants ARE required for search to be reasonable 1 Search warrant itself provides validity at inception 2 If warrant says look for a shotgun in house officer can only look in places where a shotgun could be hidden can t open sma jewelry box 3 The smaller the item the more places officers can look b Exceptions to the Search Warrant Requirement i Search Incident to Valid Arrest SIVA once there is a valid arrest the police can conduct a search without a warrant 1 Causes issues if arrest is determined to be unlawful 2 Assumption every time arrest is made the officer is concerned with their own safety searching for weapons and preventing destruction of evidence 3 For validity in scope can only search person and the area within immediate control any area they can reach for 4 Chime vs California a WHERE police can search after arrest b Had a valid arrest warrant but not search warrant c Police nd stolen goods in bedroom on 2nCI oor not accepted because it was beyond reasonable SCOPE only would have been able to search his body or reaching distance d l Limiting authority of police to search giving greater protection to rights of individuals e Due process model Warren court 5 US vs Robinson O39QJ f g HOW person can be searched Robinson was arrested for driving with revoked license and then of cer searched him felt something in his shirt and took it out it was a container with drugs in it Robinson claimed of cer exceeded permissible scope of SIVA once he knew it wasn t a weapon or evidence regarding speci c crime Supreme court said it WAS reasonable i quotSearch of the person of the arresteequot means FULL SEARCH including all containers on the person whether or not it has to do with the crime being arrested for ii Of cers don t have time to think about what evidence they are looking for in terms of the speci c crime This case clari ed Chimel l facts on the search of the person enlarges permissible scope of the search of the person Crime control model Burger court Less protection of rights of individuals 6 New York vs Belton a b C g Deals with search of a car after occupant has been arrested Of cer searches car with 4 defendants all right outside of car While searching he nds a jacket with coke in the zipped pocket Takes immediate control idea and apply it to searching a car Belton argued of cer exceeded permissible scope Court says WAS reasonable l immediate control includes the entire passenger compartment entire INTERIOR of car and any containers anything that holds something else therein l can t search the trunk Based on ruling in Chimel permissible scope 7 Thor ton vs US a b C h g Thornton is driving car will ilega license plates Thornton is ahead of of cer and turns into parking lot parks gets out of car and starts walking towards building Of cer does same thing and gets to Thornton before he gets inside Of cer asks Thornton if he has drugs on him and he says yes l he is arrested of cer searches him and puts him in police car Of cer searches Thornton s car and nds gun Thornton argues search of car was invalid because he was not in the car or standing next to it at the time he was arrested so car was not within immediate control Supreme court says its VALID l because he was a recent occupant of the car 8 Arizona vs Gant law we have now a Combo of ideas from Robinson Thornton Belton Of cers go to house looking for someone else but nd Gant instead they ask for his name They ran his name nd out he doesn t have a valid license and then see him driving so they arrest him They search his car after Gant was arrested and already in police car nd a jacket with drugs in pocket Question can police search the car even after the guy has been placed in the police car and where the police do not have reason to believe there is evidence of a crime in that car Court says NO because this decision was being consistent with previous cases i There are 2 things that justify the search car is within immediate control of the arrestee OR there is probable cause to believe there is offense speci c evidence in that car that connects defendant for offense for which he is arrested ii In Belton car was within immediate control iii In Thornton probable cause there would be drugs in the car since he had drugs on him evidence connected to the offense for which he was arrested ii Automobile Exception 1 LIMITED to cars l because a car can be quickly driven away needs to be searched immediately 2 Carroll vs US a b c Police must have probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in that car NOT automatic Validity at inception probable cause to search car Validity in scope can look anywhere where the item about which they have probable cause could possibly be hidden INCLUDES trunk l depends on the item shotgun wouldn t be in glove compartment iii Inventory Searches 1 South Dakota vs Opperman a an Car has been towed and was going to be impounded but they always search rst to look for valuables and take inventory not to investigate Of cer found pot in the car while doing this had no reason to believe it would be there didn t have warrant Supreme court says this IS reasonable Can happen without reasonable cause or scope because it was an ADMINISTRATIVE search Requirement car has to be lawfully impounded SIVA arrest rst AE search rst then arrest ISA car was impounded iv Plain View Doctrine 1 Two requirements need both a Police must be legally there in the position to observe the item vi vii 2 b Must be immediately apparent that the item observed is indeed evidence of a crime probable cause Example if warrant is for a shotgun but see pot laying on the table they can take it Consent l waiver of 4th amendment right give permission to search 1 2 3 4 So don t need search warrant or probable cause In general for a waiver to be valid it must be voluntary knowing aware intelligent knows consequences For consent it ONLY has to be voluntary If of cer asks to search car and suspect says no that is not enough reasonable suspicion because he is just asserting his 4th amendment right Open Fields Exception 1 Hester vs US a Open elds established b No reasonable expectation of privacy when you do something illegal in an open eld in plain view activities have been exposed to the public c So of cer would not need warrant to enter that property to see what was going on 2 Oliver vs US a Of cer gets a tip that someone is growing pot b Of cer doesn t have enough info for reasonable cause for search warrant but he goes and checks it out anyway c Oliver had posted sign that say keep out no trespassing d He sees the pot so they he goes and gets search warrant e Oliver argues they needed search warrant the rst time the of cer went there f Ruled that the signs were NOT a reasonable expectation of privacy society must recognize it too g Court said there was NO reasonable expectation of privacy in this secluded area that was beyond curtilage of the home h Took the open elds doctrine and applied it to area that wasn t so open l EXPANDED it i So of cer didn t need a warrant to go back there because 4th amendment didn t apply 3 Open eld vs Curtilage Cali vs Greenwood a When curtilage ends open eld begins NO reasonable expectation of privacy b There IS a reasonable expectation of privacy in curtilage but not as much as in the home can get warrant if illegal activity is seen in curtilage Frisks 1 5 conditions that justify stop amp frisk a Where a police of cer observes unusual conduct that leads him to reasonably conclude in the light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot b Where the person with whom he is dealing may be armed and dangerous C d e Where in the course of investigating this behavior he identi es himself as a police of cer Where he makes reasonable inquiry Where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others safety 2 Terry vs Ohio a b h Stop amp Frisk doctrine Approaches guys he thinks are going to break into a place suspicion but not probable cause and then he searches them amp nds a gun Question Was the of cer allowed to stop the guys Was he allowed to frisk them Answer Yes if the of cer has reasonable suspicion to believe the individual is armed and dangerous then he can search the guy to look for weapons l concern for of cer safety Frisk limited search of the person to look for weapons pat down of outer clothing Of cer can go investigate if there is reasonable suspicion and then has to ask questions If based on the answers he believes they are dangerous he can frisk i Order stop ask questions frisk They realized this wasn t practical changed it to STOP FRISK ASK QUESTIONS For validity at inception a valid stop AND reasonable suspicion to believe the suspect is armed and dangerous Validity in scope limited search of the outer clothing to look for weapons 3 Minnesota vs Dickerson a b an In high crime area of cer sees guy walk out of known crack house He stops him amp frisks him as he was conducting it he felt an item in his shirt pocket amp he knew it was not a weapon but he moved the item around and then he came to the conclusion that the item was crack so he took it out of the pocket Minnesota argued we need an exception Ruled there is a Plain Touch Exception if during the course of a valid frisk and has reason to believe he feels an item like drugs he can seize it viii Protective Sweep 1 Maryland vs Buie ix Emergency Aid Exception 1 Michigan vs Fisher IV Exclusionary Rule not in constitution created by supreme court a De nition i Prohibits the use of evidence seized by federal agents if they violated the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure b Purposes i Mechanism to enforce 4th amendment otherwise it has no value Government needs penaltyconsequences for violating 4th Controversy sometimes cases would fall apart if they couldn t use this evidence leading guilty man to go free c Weeks vs US case where it was created lt s of a constitutional dimension necessary even though its not in it Federal case as of 1914 4th amendment ONLY applied to federal government so same thing goes for exclusionary rule Silver platter doctrine l if state agents obtained it illegally and gave it to a federal agent it was still admissible d Wolf vs Colorado 2issues 1 Is 4th amendment fundamental right such that it is part of the 14th amendment due process clause so that it would apply to the states a Answer YES now binding to states 2 Does exclusionary rule apply to states does it accompany 4th amendment a Answer NO it s up to each state to decide if it wants to use it as a remedy of 4th amendment violation e Mapp vs Ohio Revisits second issue in Wolf is exclusionary rule required in states 1 Now they said yes overruled Wolf doesn t touch rst issue though First shot red in criminal law revolution bringing states up to standards of national government f Good Fait Exception US vs Leon 1 If police rely on validity of search warrant and stay within parameters evidence is admissible even if later found to be invalid 2 Crime control model V 5th Amendment Privilege Against Selflncrimination a Voluntariness No Governmental Coercion Part of 5th amendment we can t be compelled if admission is made involuntarily can t be used as evidence But this happens naturally during an interrogation so something needs to be done 5th amendment is broader than Miranda doesn t ONLY apply to custodial interrogations b Voluntary Confessions c Applies to Testimonial Evidence Only d Miranda Warnings Miranda vs Arizona 1 Arrested validly questioned routinely ONLY problem was failure to read rights a Consequence his confession was presumed involuntary under law conviction overturned 2 Focus is interrogation at police station 3 3 years later added that it doesn t matter where interrogation occurs Miranda always applies 4 Nature of offense doesn t matter ii Procedural Safeguards 1 Miranda warnings are a You have the right to remain silent b Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law c You have a right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer present during any questioning d If you can t afford a lawyer one will be obtained for you if you want i Purpose 1 Mechanism to prevent inherent compulsion of custodial interrogation iv Custodial Interrogations 1 Need both custody and interrogation for Miranda a If someone comes in voluntarily to confess or is stopped for routine traffic stop they are not in custody so Miranda doesn t apply 2 Key inherent compulsion any time a person is taken into custody and subject to questions they will feel pressure to talk 3 Interrogation a Expressed question OR any wordsconduct from police likely to bring about incriminating response b Police have convo with each other in front seat and suspect hears not considered interrogation v Waiver of Rights 1 Must be voluntary no coercion knowing aware heard warnings and intelligent know consequences 2 If person asserts there can be no questioning vi Reassertion of Rights 1 If a person waives their rights and then they assert their rights must fully honor the assertion vii Exceptions 1 Routing Booking Question Exception a Can ask basic questions that are necessary to complete paperwork 2 Public Safety Exception a Women approaches officer says she s just been raped by a man who has a gun and went into the grocery store b Cop catches him nds holster but no gun c Cop thinks gun is loose in store so he asks suspect where is the gun d THEN officer reads Miranda e Only asked 1 question before it was productive though f There was a more important concern for the safety of the public so courts said it was okay g Narrow exception can only ask those questions necessary to protect public prior to Miranda viii Evidentiary Applications 1 Harris vs New York a Burger court crime control b Miranda violation but no coercion c Court said it cannot be used to address guilt but if defendant takes the stand and contradicts himself it can be used to impeach credibility ix Dickerson vs US 1 Rehnquist court EXCEPTION due process 2 Expressly reaffirmed Miranda e NonCustodial Interrogations i 5th amendment still applies in noncustodial interrogation VI US Court System a Dual Court System i One court system at federal level and one at state Product of federalism division of power between national and state iii They both create their own courts iv Federal deal with federal law state deal with state law V In order for any court to decide a case it must have jurisdiction b Jurisdiction 1st question is always does the court have jurisdiction i Geographic Jurisdiction territory where crime occurred ii Hierarchical Jurisdiction judicial ladder 1 OriginalJurisdiction a First court to hear the case trial court 2 Appellate Jurisdiction hearing case on appeal a Mandatory Appellate Jurisdiction b Discretionary Appellate Jurisdiction iii Subject MatterJurisdiction 1 Limited Jurisdiction hears minor criminalcivil cases 2 General Jurisdiction seriousmajor criminalcivil cases 3 Federal Question Jurisdiction federal court hears questions involving federal law Constitution Federal legislationacts of congress Executive orders from president Rules and regulations administered by federal administrative agencies e Federal treaties c Federal Court System i Primary Federal Courts all are appointed by the president and serve for life 1 US District Courts a Basic trial court b Federal trial court of GENERAL jurisdiction original jurisdiction 2 US Court of Appeals a Sees rst appeal from District Court MUST review all cases b General jurisdiction and Appellate jurisdiction c Federal intermediate appellate court 3 US Supreme Court a Substantial issues of law goom d State i vi vii viii ix x VII Need to be asked by defendant for case to be heard since there is only right to one appeal They have major discretion hear about 8090 of the 8000 requests Federal court of last resort appellate jurisdiction general jurisdiction Can also have original jurisdiction state vs state cases C d e Article III Courts vs Article Courts 1 All the federal courts are Article III a District and Court of appeals are pursuant to Article III power Supreme Court was speci cally created in Article III 2 Article I Writ of Certiorari quotto make more certainquot 1 Order issued by higher court to lower court to send out record of case Supreme appeals 2 If it s granted court is taking case 3 If denied case stands Rule of Four 1 In order to grant writ of cert 4 out of 9 justices need to vote in favor of taking the case 2 During case need 5 out of 9 votes to decide what law isestablish precedent Court System Each state has at least 1 federal district court in the state to hear federal cases some states have more than one district court so they are divided into different districts Still have the right to 1 appeal In states it depends on which court because not all states have intermediate appellate If it has intermediate rst appeal goes there If not court of last resort Most criminal cases are state cases since states are responsible for enforcing law In state case constitutional issues come up Miranda consent jury l likely to arise in any criminal case 1 Then it involves a federal question goes to last court in state the goes to US Supreme court Trial Courts of Limited jurisdiction 1 Lowerinferior courts minor offenses entry point 2 justice of peace county and municipal courts Trial Courts of General jurisdiction 1 ALL states have this 2 Major trial courts have power and authority to try and decide any case including appeals from lower court Intermediate Appellate Courts Court of Last Resort aka state supreme court 1 ALL states have this 2 If this is the only appellate court it must hear all cases Law Enforcement in the US a Emergence of Modern Policing Began in the 9th century in England trying to protect kingdom against Danish invasion 1 Instituted system of mutual pledge organized the country around family groupings that assumed responsibility for the acts of their members By 17th century 4 5 1 Of cers enforced the law amp kept peace 2 3 There were also parish constables amp beadles constables Magistrates presided in courts assistants Very corrupt amp had limited impact on law enforcement There were also thieftakers private detectives had no official status as police Policing system advanced considerably during 18th century in England 1 2 Henry Fielding credited with laying the foundation for the rst modern police force Robert Peel drew up the rst police bill that was passed by Parliament London s Metropolitan Police because a centralized agency with responsibility for both preventing amp apprehending crime b History of Law Enforcement in the US 39 Colonists were constantly threatened by foreign enemies and had military to protect them But the towns had no protection against lawbreaking from within in 17th century village authorities began selecting men to serve as guardians of peace Colonial Constables and Colonial Watches 1 4 5 As colonial town populations grew number of violent behaviors 6 Constables appeared in all the colonies as soon as local governments were organized 2 Were paid for their services through nes 3 Colonial watches were paid volunteers and provided nighttime secur y Peacekeeping activities were supported by municipal authority increased l peacekeepers were too easygoing about it Growing levels of lawlessness led to organization of more formal police forces iv Sheriff v Posse Comitatus 1 2 vi 1 2 3 4 3 First formal law enforcement agents They apprehended criminals but also conducted elections collected taxes and took custody of public funds Eventually chose by popular election As America became more populated they evolved into an active agent of law enforcement quotpower of the countyquot Became crucial in frontier law enforcement Is at absolute disposal of the sheriff members were required to respond when called on to do so Become an important component of criminal justice machinery because it could place the entire power of a community under leadership of the sheriff Texas Rangers 1 Territorial police agencies help protect settlers against Native American tribes 2 Organized as a corps of ghters when the Texas revolution against Mexico broke out 3 Afterwards rangers evolved into an effective law enforcement agency vii Federal Marshals 1 Represent authority of federal court viii New York Metropolitan Police Force 1 Offered 247 protection for the rst time because of fear of crime and social disintegration c Structure of Law Enforcement in the US i Federal Law Enforcement Agencies 1 Their units are highly specialized distinctive resources amp training 2 Jurisdictional boundaries are limited by congressional authority 3 Federal Air Marshal Service a b Undercover cops on planes Most secretive law enforcement agencies 4 Department ofJustice a b FBI chief investigative body i Legal jurisdiction extending to all federal crimes that are not the speci c responsibility of some other federal enforcement agency DEA Control the use and distribution of narcotics c ATF alcohol tobacco rearms amp explosives d i Protect nation from violent criminals illegal use amp traf cking of rearms explosives arson bombings terrorism etc US Marshals Service i Under direct authority of US attorney general ii Enforce all federal laws that are not the speci c responsibility of other federal agencies 5 Department of Homeland Security a Most signi cant transformation of the US government consolidated 22 executive level agencies into a single cabinet dept Made after Sept 11 main goal is to protect against future terror attacks US Secret Service i Primary role protect president amp other government of cials ii Also has investigative units that focus on forgery and counterfeiting of US currency US Customs and Border Protection CBP i Administering laws that regulate admission exclusion naturalization and deportation of aliens as well as preventing illegal entry of aliens and smuggling of illegal goods US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ICE i Largest investigative arm of DHS responsible for identifying and shutting down weaknesses at nation s borders f US Citizenship and Immigration Services USCIS i Investigators administration of laws related to the importation of foreign goods collection of duties penalties and other fees and prevention of smuggling g US Coast Guard i Special nava force with responsibilities for suppressing contraband trade and aiding vessels in distress 6 Department of Treasury a IRS administration and enforcement of federal tax laws 7 Department of the Interior a US Fish and Wildlife Service i Conserve protect and enhance sh wildlife plants and their habitats for the continuing bene t of the American people ii Some of the broadest law enforcement powers in US 8 Department of State a Bureau of Diplomatic Security i International investigations threat analysis cyber security counterterrorism 9 Postal Inspection Service jurisdiction in all criminal matters involving mail and safety of all postal valuables property and personnel ii State Law Enforcement Agencies 1 Enforce state law and investigate crimes 2 Also provide law enforcement services in rural areas that have no local policing entities 3 Each state has its own police agency iii Local Law Enforcement Agencies 1 Sheriff chief law enforcement officer in their county amp has countywide jurisdiction a Elected in most counties b 3 responsibilities i Provides law enforcement ii Maintains countyjails iii Provides personnel to serve as court bailiffs transport defendants etc 2 Jurisdictional disputes emerged with the establishment of city police a In some cases states gave cities authority to provide for their own police protection b In others agreements were made where sheriffs will not enforce the criminal laws 3 Police in Private Sector d e iv Interest in private policing has increased in recent decades l because of rising concern over street crime dramatic increases in industrial thefts etc However this is not a new concept l before formal public police were organized ALL policing was private Step in when conventional law enforcement is either ill equippedprohibited from handling There are more private police officers than the total number of federal state and local police Vigilantes individuals who take the law into their own hands International 1 lnterpol largest crime ghting organization in the world 2 Depository of information about wanted criminals neither investigative or enforcement d De nition of Police e Peacekeeping Role of Police i Officers typically confront few serious crimes ii Most police work centers around peacekeeping role iii 3 styles of performing peacekeeping role 1 Legalistic style violation of law amp the use of threats or actual arrest to solve disputes l highly productive 2 Watchman style focuses on informal ways of resolving con icts I order maintenance motivation 3 Service style emphasizes community satisfaction as opposed to the enforcement of speci c laws iv Behavior of individual police of cers is closely linked to the structure amp function of the f Police Organization i All police organizations are structured on a militaristic model I they are built around a hierarchy of clearly de ned roles amp responsibilities 1 Rules amp regulations guide police activities and a chain of command amp an administrative staff work to maintain amp increase organizational ef ciency ii Division of labor all large police organizations amp many smaller ones have a relatively xed amp clearly de ned division of labor iii Chain amp units of command orders requests etc should ow updown through each level of the police hierarchy without bypassing any level of supervision or command 1 Not uniform terminology but often of cers commanders sergeants lieutenants captains majors chiefs l FIGURE 52 iv Functional units bureaus which are composed of divisions which can include sections forces squads g Police Work i 3 categories of police activities 1 Line Services a Patrol criminal investigation traf c control b Primary amp most visible c Patrol i Protect public safety ii Enforce the law iii Control traf c iv Conduct preliminary criminal investigations v Interpret the law d Criminal investigations i More sustained investigations ii Identi cation location amp apprehension of criminal offenders iii Collection amp preservation of physical evidence iv Location amp interviewing of witnesses v Recovery amp return of stolen property vi Clearance rate proportion of crimes that result in arrest 1 It is one of the criteria on which they are evaluated so many police tend to focus on crimes that are most likely to be cleared 2 Administrative Services a Back up the efforts of the line staff b Training personnel management planning amp research legal matters community relations internal investigation 3 Auxiliary Services a Assists the line staff in carrying out the basic police functions with specialized units assigned to communications recordkeeping data processing temporary detention lab studies supply amp maintenance ii Specialized Police Units 1 Many large urban police departments have specialized units for enforcing laws or gathering information about organized crime a Cybercrime Units b SWAT teams use aggressive military procedures in exceptionally dangerous situations or potentially explosive s ua ons c Sting operations and drugenforcement signi cant in urban law enforcement i Use of undercover methods to control large scale crime d Crime analysis units track geographic pattern of crime h Police Discretion i Full enforcement of the law would require an investigation of every disturbing event and every complaint and vigorous enforcement of every statute in the books impossible and undesirable 1 So police are forced to be selective about enforcing some laws and not others 2 Few clearcut policies to guide these choices ii Police integrity and professionalism 1 The exercise of powers and use of discretion according to the highest standards of competence fairness and honesty 2 Newest approach focuses on enhancing integrity with police professionalism instead of the bad apple theory that its individual police of cers that make bad decisions a Stresses importance of organizational rule making detecting investigating and disciplining rule violations circumscribing The Code iii Police subculture 1 Subculture normative system of a group that is smaller that and essentially different from the dominant culture 2 Includes learned behavior that is common to members of the group and ways of acting and thinking that together constitute a relatively cohesive cultural system 3 Police are members of this subculture 4 Their system of shared norms values goals career patterns lifestyle and occupational structure is different from that of the wider society within which they function iv Police personality 1 Policing does not attract a distinctive personality type rather the nature of police socialization practices creates a distinctive working personality among many patrol officers a Police cynicism integral part of the police b The notion that all people are motivated by evil and sel shness c Develops through contact with the police subculture and the nature of police work d Police are set apart from the rest of society because they have the power to regulate the lives of others e Also their constant interactions with crime and the more troublesome aspects of social life serve to diminish their faith in humanity i Police Misconduct Corruption i Very common in this occupation because 1 Police stand at the front lines of criminal justice system in a nation where crime rates are high and the demands for illegal goods and services are widespread 2 They work autonomously and spend much of their time interacting with individuals involved in the world of illegal goods and services 3 Most evident in these speci c areas a Meals amp services goal is to encourage police presence in their establishment Kickbacks referrals Opportunistic theft Planned theft and robbery Shakedown demand money in exchange for not enforcing law Case xing Protection and private security Patronage use of of cial position to in uence decision making gaining political strength ii Causes of Police Corruption 1 Society at large explanation corrupted by the citizens Dene SLOT a Slipperyslope hypothesis l starts off with harmless and wellintentioned practices and eventually leads to all manner of crimes for pro t b Focuses on culture and characteristics of whole communities 2 Structural Explanations a quotThe Codequot the informal prohibition in the culture of policing against reporting the misconduct of other of cers b Step by step process c Community policing involve members of community in crime prevention 3 RottenApple Explanation a Most popular explanation b In an otherwise honest department there are a few bad officers who are operating on their own spreads to others iii Police Brutality unwarranted or excessive use of physical force or verbal 1 Issues of police misconduct brutality and deadly force took on public and political urgency in the 60 s under criminal law revolution of Earl Warren 2 Use of deadly force a All jurisdictions permit officers to use lethal force in their own defense and most allow them to re on a eeing felon if they believe the suspect will endanger or harm others b Tennessee vs Garner 3 Nonlethal weapons a Most common Tasers conducted energy devices electric current to temporarily immobilize suspects b Good because fewer shootings but controversial because some deaths have still occurred now have guidelines for appropriate use iv Controlling Police Misconduct 1 Legislative Control and Court Response a An individual can hold a law enforcement agency liable for an incident of police misconduct 2 Civilian Review Boards a In uence of citizens on police behavior may be most evident in small communities b CRB appointed groups of citizens that oversee police behavior and review cases of misconduct l develop positive police and community relationships increase police professionalism 3 Police Organization Control and Response a Control of police misconduct from within police departments has two forms preventative and punitive internal affairs
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'