You need to submit a short paper (approximately 2 pages – double spaced) on each of the below three questions. As such, your entire term paper should be approximately 6 pages in total length.
Do not plagiarize (example – copy & paste) your submissions directly from the information on the web or in books. You need to answer the questions in your own words after doing your research. I will submit your paper through two academic plagiarism checker websites. If you have simply copied your answer from another source you will receive no credit for your submission.
Below are the three questions. To submit your paper, draft up your answer and then submit it through the “Quiz” section. Submit all three answers at the same time.
1. a. What is the history of the exclusionary rule? b. Give me the pros and cons of having the exclusionary rule. In other words, should we have it? Give me both sides of the argument.
2. Describe the various stages (steps) of a criminal case; from arrest, then pretrial and then through the trial stages. Give details of each stage and potential issues that may exist.
3. The 4th amendment normally requires a police officer to have probable cause or a search warrant before a search can be made. However, there are many exceptions to this requirement. List eight exceptions and explain why each exception is allowed and how each exception works.
Question No 1
What is the history of the exclusionary rule? b. Give me the pros and cons of having the exclusionary rule. In other words, should we have it? Give me both sides of the argument.
History of Exclusionary Rule
The exclusionary rule explains that the shreds of evidence obtained through the illegal activities would not be considered by the government and it has significance in the interpretation of the fourth amendment. Without the exclusionary rule, the government would be free to collect the pieces of evidence through unfair means and would violate the amendments. The emergence of the exclusionary rule was observed in 1886 when the Supreme Court observed that the fourth amendment was violated by the attorney of the United States. The court ordered to seize the home of the defendants and the documents that were violated and were unconstitutional under the fourth amendment. Different versions of the Exclusionary rule were existing in the United States before 1961 until this rule was extended for the nation (Deahl, 2018).
Pros and cons of having an Exclusionary Rule
In the process of the exclusionary rule, any evidence collected by unfair means that violate the Fourth or Fifth Amendment would not be against a person in the criminal proceeding. This evidence would not be included in the documents that would be used against the suspect.
- It requires lawmakers to follow the Law
For maintaining consistency in society, it is very important to follow the rules and regulations. Without the exclusionary rule, people can collect evidence from unfair means and the commitment to the rules and laws makes them understand that no one is above the law (Hawkins, 2021).
- Requires probable cause
In the United States probable cause means that before issuing any warrant of collecting shreds of evidence against an individual, it is necessary to have reasonable suspicion. If a person has done something wrong, his action must be examined before subjecting them to the search. It reduces the total accusations in society.
- Limits the power of government
In the absence of the exclusionary rule, the governments would be controlling the populations through their concepts of law. It helps people to protect their private properties to be used by the officials of government against them.
- Assumes innocence before guilt
In the United State justice system, people are assumed to be innocent before they are proved guilty by the authorized judges. The concept of exclusionary rule helps to promote fairness.
- Reduce the risks of manufactured pieces of evidence
According to the exclusionary rule, there must be evident documents against the actions of an individual to prove his wrongdoings. If the document of evidence is not available, the person is not guilty. This rule prevents the officials from making false evidence (Derek, 2018).
- This rule does not affect innocent
The exclusionary rule protects the individual who would possibly be convicted of crimes just because of their actions. The search and seizures would be more for the general population but the innocent individuals would still be innocent. The pieces of evidence would be fabricated without the exclusionary rule.
- Emphasizes law enforcement instead of crime
The emphasis of the exclusionary rule is on the processes that are involved in the enforcement of the law that is followed by the officials to collect the evidence. In the exclusionary rule, the officials are scrutinized more than the individual who was accused of the crime just to check if the evidence is collected by fair means or not (Hardiman, 2018).
- Can only be applied in the criminal proceedings
The exclusionary rule has an association with the fourth amendment and it is a concept of law, not a legal rule to be followed. Because this is a principle, not a law that’s why it can only be applied to the criminal proceeding, not civil proceedings.
- It hits taxpayers in the bank
The purpose of this rule is to protect the people who are accused of the crime and creates deeper work for the administration. If there are more laws to be followed, then more costs would be paid and no studies are done to calculate the average cost paid to apply the rules. There are 18000 police officers in the US and the average income of the police officers is $58,240. The cost is 7.65 million per hour which means that $214.2M is spent on the administration of the exclusionary rule (Hawkins, 2021).
Should we have it?
The exclusionary rule is beneficial to get protection by the law and prevent other people from accusing any individual who is innocent. This is the major benefit that when somebody is accused of wrongdoing then his action is examined before applying for a search warrant against them. This activity prevents the chances of false pieces of evidence and innocent would not be punished for something that is not done by them. That’s why it is important to have the exclusionary rule. In the absence of this rule, officials and government authorities would be free to use their powers and violate the rights of the people. This rule bound every official to follow the law otherwise there would be serious consequences that they have to face. All these reasons support the idea that it would be good to have an exclusionary rule (Derek, 2018).
Question no 02
Describe the various stages (steps) of a criminal case; from arrest, then pretrial and then through the trial stages. Give details of each stage and potential issues that may exist
Stages of Criminal cases
The prosecution of the crime has consisted of different stages that start from the arrest and end at trials. Most criminal cases are terminated because the defendants accept the plea bargain that is offered by the prosecution. The plea bargain allows an individual to accept their fault for getting lenient sentences.
The prosecution of the crime begins with the arrest of the defendants. The reasons behind the arrest of an individual include that 1) officers may have observed the defendant be committing a crime 2) the officers may have assumed that the crime has been committed by the person and 3) the person is arrested by the police officers under the valid warrants of the arrest. After the arrest, the booking of the suspect is started being the police to place the individual in police custody. After the custody of individuals, a citation is issued by the police officers for the suspect with special instruction for appearing in the court hearings (LII, 2022).
If the suspect is in the custody of police officers and his bail is granted then he would be paying the fee of bail to be released. The release of the suspect is ensured with the promise that he would be appearing in all of the court hearings. The release of the suspect is based on the own recognizance that is approved by the court considering the nature of the crime, the seriousness of the crime, a threat to society, and the criminal records of the suspects. The issues associated with this stage are that suspects often disappear and do not attend the hearings of the court until the cases are dismissed.
This is the first appearance of the suspect in court. In this stage, judges analyze all the charges which are filed against the defendants and decide if the suspect is guilty or not. The dates of bails and further proceedings are also reviewed by the judges.
In this stage, questions are asked from the witnesses and both parties start to argue about the suspect’s actions. After these questions, a final finding would be created by the judges. The grand jury only hears from the prosecutor and sometimes, the grand jury calls their witnesses and requests further investigation of the case. The grand jury must decide if sufficient evidence is collected against the defendants or not (Weigend, 2018).
The pretrial is brought by the defendant as well as the prosecution for resolving the issues and for deciding which evidence would be presented at the final trial. The issues which are discussed in the pre-trial stage are associated with the severity of the cases. The lawyers of both parties involved in the case can file a motion of pre-trial to remove the pieces of evidence of a particular kind. The judge has the right to make the decision in the pre-trial stage or to give another hearing for answering the motions.
At this stage of the trial, the suspect would be found either guilty or innocent. The burden of the proof is beard by the prosecution in the criminal trial stage. The prosecutor has to prove that crime has been committed by the accused and is guilty. The defendants have the right to a jury trial according to their constitutional rights. The opening and closing statements of the trial help the jury to decide if the defendant is guilty or not. In case the jury was unable to make the unanimous verdict then it would be considered a mistrial. The mistrial would either dismiss the case or a new jury would be selected for the case. If the defendant is proved guilty then he would be sentenced.
Question # 03
The 4th amendment normally requires a police officer to have probable cause or a search warrant before a search can be made. However, there are many exceptions to this requirement. List eight exceptions and explain why each exception is allowed and how each exception works.
Exception of having search warrants
The fourth amendment limits the search of people for houses and effects that are supported by probable cause. In a few circumstances, the police officers have allowed the conduct of the searches and seized the pieces of evidence without the need for a warrant. The exception of the warrant requirements are given below:
1. Stop and Frisk
The stepping of someone on the street is detention and in the fourth amendment, it is considered the seizure of the person. The Supreme Court has said if the cop has reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime and the officer has authority to stop the person on the street and if the suspect is armed then he would be pat-down (Haines, et al., 2020).
Consent is one of the most warrantless consent searches. The police officer usually likes the consent because it provides the liberty to seize things and a free pass for the research. A warrant is not needed for the consent and police officers have complete authority over the consent.
3. Plain view
The ability to seize something is called the plain which provides the authority to police for seizing the items that are visible to the police officers and are considered illegal. In this situation, police officers do not require any research warrant and they are free to seize the items (Benton, 2018).
4. Exigent Circumstances
This is another way to be considered an emergency. Taking the warrant often takes time and if something is expected to have happened then a warrant is not required to prevent the danger. The police officer would be able to avoid the requirements of a fourth warrant. The Exigent also provides the liberty to the police officers to enter private buildings without a warrant if they have sensed that a crime is about to happen or pieces of evidence are expected to be fabricated (Kinports, 2018).
5. Hot Pursuit
The hot pursuit is known as the police chase. In most cases, police officers require a warrant to get into the house of somebody. In case the police are chasing a felony suspect and that suspect has entered a private home the police would n t require a warrant and they would follow the suspect under hot pursuit (Gentithes, 2022).
6. Search Incident to Arrest
The search incidents of the lawful arrest is another kind of warrant exception that police officers have to search the belongings of the suspect. Normally police officers require a search warrant before the search execution but if the person has been arrested according to the laws then police have the right to search the clothes, car, and everything that is carried by the suspect (Deahl, 2018).
7. Automobile Exception
The automobile exception of the search warrant requirement is another exception that allows the cops to search for the vehicles carried by the suspect in case they believe that vehicles carry illegal items.
8. Safety Check exception
In some cases, police officers believe that persons inside the building or the cars are in danger. For example, if the neighbors called the police that gas is leaked and house members are in danger then police officers have the legal right to enter the house without any warrant and ensure the safety of the people living inside the house. The police officers can search the entire house including the kitchen and basement etc.
If you need a similar but plagiarism-free “Exclusionary Rule, Criminal case stages, and Search warrant exceptions”, then feel free to contact us!