Criminal Law and Procedure Week 5 Homework

Within the criminal justice system discuss the effectiveness of legal and non-legal measures in achieving justice.

(1) Whether a plaintiff must plead and prove willful and wanton conduct in order to

In the United State we have many systems, like all others, it is separated the use of some irrelevant or untrustworthy evidence. The system that I am referring to and the one that we will be discussing in this paper is the exclusionary rule. It is the introduction of a good evidence, that it is obtained by a bad law enforcement, is most common in the United State than other countries legal system. To put it in other words, the exclusionary rule is controversial. Therefore, many experts say that it sets criminals free on minor points. In this paper, I will speak about the pros and cons of the exclusionary rule, how it is effecting the criminal justice system of the United State. In addition, I will speak and summarize the case of Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott from 1998, this will be a great example of the exclusionary rule and the effects about them. Furthermore, I will show how this case was important with the Exclusionary Rule, and my opinion on the matter.

To begin with, criminal justice is a system that is designed to maintain social control, which means it is a necessary aspect of every society since “Laws are the conditions under which independent and isolated men united to form a society” (Beccaria, 1764: 16). In order words, crime control deals with the methods that are taken by a society to reduce its crime. As a matter of fact, there are various crime control strategies from community policing to risk assessments. In addition to the different tactics for controlling crime, there are several theories that not only attempt to explain the causes of crime, but also outline different ways to handle offenders; for example, deterrence, rehabilitation, and even retribution.

1. Identify and describe the three possible alternatives for applying the Fourth Amendment to “stop and frisk” situations. Also, identify which alternative the U.S. Supreme Court adopted and explain why.

In chapters six through ten of The Collapse of American Criminal Justice, Stuntz talks about the changes that were being made in the criminal justice system, and the changes that can help fix the system. He goes in details when it comes changes in the system, from the courts putting limits on what the criminal procedure, for example, the “exclusionary rule”. Also the mention of the rise and fall of crime across the United States. Lastly, mentioning the famous landmark cases that helped sparked these changes.

The criminal justice system in the United States has traditionally operated under two fundamentally different theories. One theory is the Crime Control Model. This theory is characterized by the idea that criminals should be aggressively pursued and crimes aggressively punished. The other theory is the Due Process Model. This theory is characterized by the idea that the rights of the accused need to be carefully protected in any criminal justice investigation. (Levy, 1999)

A detention is reasonable when the detaining officer can point to specific articulable facts that, under the totality of the circumstance, provide an objective basis for suspecting the particular person detained may be involved in criminal activity. (People v. Souza (1994) 9 Cal.4th 224.) As such, an investigatory stop based on mere curiosity, rumor or hunch is an unlawful seizure, even though the officer may be acting in good faith. (People v. Clair (1992) 2 Cal.4th 629.) Nonetheless, reasonable suspicion cannot be justified after the fact by evidence of criminal activity uncovered during the course of the detention. (People v. Gale (1973) 9 Cal.3d 788.) Moreover, mere proximity cannot be enough to create reasonable suspicion because proximity

Is conducted by a single judge to establish if a case is eligible for a trial by jury.

On March 14, 2013, the writer of this work attended a criminal sentencing docket at the Morgan County Courthouse in the Circuit Court in Decatur, Alabama. The Honorable Glenn Thompson was presiding over the criminal sentencing docket. The docket was five pages long with multiple attorneys and defendants present in the courtroom.

In chapter one, Joel Samaha discusses the road map of criminal procedure. Throughout the roadmap, the author demonstrates the overall guidelines as to how one is eventually institutionalized. The author claims the vast majority of law abiding citizens seize to surpass the first part of his ideal journey. However if an individual is charged, they will undergo a series of five components.

There are crimes every single day in the United States.  Some people are arrested for certain reasons.  Those reasons may not always be clear, but due to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, an individual is able to know his or her rights to better understand the arrest and the trial that is to come.

Hall, D. E. (2014). Criminal Law and Procedure, 7th Edition: Cengage Learning. Retrieved November 10, 2017, from

The differences between legal rules and other kinds of rules is that criminal law refers to the consequences associated with breaking them. As the substantive law meaning that it is the law of crimes, referring that Criminal law is the code conduct that all in the society need to follow the rule, and the prohibitions on murder, assault, and burglary. Meaning that if an individual violates or commits these crimes they are going to be treated as a criminal by punishing act from the state. Civil law is refers to procedural law to follow the rule of the state from someone that has committed a crime. Which it is divided into 5 categories, for example torts, property, contract, family, and juvenile law.

Although rationality does not always exist, much of the functioning of criminal justice agencies is unplanned, poorly coordinated, and unregulated. Existing systems include some components that are very ancient, additionally each of the institutions have their own set of goals and priorities that sometimes conflict with those of other institutions, or with the goals and priorities of the system as a whole. Furthermore, each of these institutions have substantial unregulated discretion in making particular decisions such as the victim's decision to report a crime (Frase & Weidner).