Transcript Document

Chapter 4 – The Rule of Law
Two Types of Law:
Criminal Law and Civil Law
There are two types of law practiced in the
United States:
• Criminal law
• Civil law
Criminal Law and Civil Law
A crime is a violation
of the penal code.
A tort is a violation
of the civil law.
civil law
A means of resolving conflicts between individuals.
It includes personal injury claims (torts), the law of
contracts and property, and subjects such as
administrative law and the regulation of public
utilities.
Substantive vs. Procedural Law
There are two types of criminal law:
• Substantive law—laws that prohibit and
penalize murder, rape, robbery, and other
crimes.
• Procedural law—laws that are concerned
with due process of law.
substantive law
The body of law that defines criminal offenses and
their penalties.
procedural law
The body of law that governs the ways in which the
substantive laws are to be administered; sometimes
called adjective or remedial law.
due process of law
The rights of people suspected of or charged with
crimes.
Creating Criminal Laws
in the United States
In the U.S., criminal laws are created by
legislative bodies, and are also affected by
interpretation by courts (case law)
Constitutions and
Legislative Bodies
• Congress enacts federal statutes.
• State legislatures enact state statutes.
• Cities, counties, and councils enact laws
generally called ordinances.
Statutes and ordinances apply only in the
particular jurisdiction in which they were
enacted.
Procedural Law:
Rights of the Accused
Most of the procedural rights given to
criminal suspects or defendants in the U.S. are
found in the Bill of Rights. Others are found
in
• Federal and state statutes
• State constitutions
• Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
The Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the person or things to be seized.
Searches and Seizures
With a Warrant
Probable cause for a search warrant requires
substantial and trustworthy evidence to
support two conclusions:
1. that the specific objects to be searched for
are connected with criminal activity; and
2. that the objects will be found in the place to
be searched.
Searches and Seizures
With a Warrant
The Fourth Amendment requires that a search
warrant contain a particular description of the
place to be searched and the person or things
to be seized.
Search warrants are required to be executed in
a reasonable amount of time, and in some
jurisdictions during certain hours of the day.
Searches and Seizures
With a Warrant
Generally, before law enforcement officers
may enter a place to conduct a search, they
must first announce that:
• they are law enforcement officers,
• they possess a warrant,
• and they are there to execute the warrant.
Searches and Seizures
With a Warrant
If in the course of conducting a legal search,
officers discover contraband or evidence of a
crime not covered by the warrant, they may
seize it without getting a new warrant.
Arrests With a Warrant
Generally, an arrest warrant is legally required
when law enforcement officers want to enter
private premises to make an arrest.
An arrest warrant is issued if substantial and
trustworthy evidence supports two
conclusions:
• A violation of the law has been committed.
• The person to be arrested committed the violation.
Searches and Seizures
Without a Warrant
The Supreme Court has allowed warrantless
searches in some circumstances:
• Incident to an arrest, police may search the
area within the suspect’s immediate control,
including an automobile, and may seize
contraband or evidence in plain view.
• In emergency situations.
• If a suspect consents to a search.
Arrests Without a Warrant
Officers may enter a private home to make a
warrantless arrest only if the offense is serious
and there are exigent circumstances, such as:
• Likely disappearance of the suspect
• Hot pursuit
Standards of Proof
Probable cause is one among a number of
standards of proof for various criminal justice
activities.
The amount of proof necessary depends on the
activity in question.
Standards of Proof
The line between probable cause and
reasonable suspicion, or even mere suspicion,
is a fine one and a matter of interpretation.
Responsibility for determining whether a
standard of proof has been met lies with
criminal courts and judicial officers.
The Exclusionary Rule
The exclusionary rule was created by the
Supreme Court in 1914, and extended to state
courts in 1961 (Mapp v. Ohio). The
exclusionary rule originally had three
purposes:
• To protect individual rights from police misconduct
• To prevent police misconduct
• To maintain judicial integrity
exclusionary rule
The rule that illegally seized evidence must be excluded
from trials.
The Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or
otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or
indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the
land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual
service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any
person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process
of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use
without just compensation.
Protection Against Compelled
Self-Incrimination
Arguably the most important procedural safeguard
in the Fifth Amendment is the protection against
compelled self-incrimination.
• The protection is based on the belief that
confessions made involuntarily may not be
truthful.
Protection Against Compelled
Self-Incrimination
In Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the court
broadened the protection against compelled
self-incrimination. Suspects must be notified
of their specific rights or their confessions
will not be admissible.
Protection Against Compelled
Self-Incrimination
The Fifth Amendment further applies to trial
procedures:
• A defendant does not have to take the witness
stand in a trial.
• The prosecution is forbidden from commenting on
the defendant’s silence or refusal to take the stand.
The Sixth Amendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an
impartial jury of 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 of the
accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses
against him; to have compulsory process for
obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the
assistance of counsel for his defense.
Right to a Speedy and Public Trial
• In determining what constitutes a speedy
trial, the Supreme Court has created a
balancing test that weighs both the
defendant’s and the prosecution’s behavior.
• The length of delay depends partly on the
nature of the charge; a longer delay may be
tolerated in more complex cases.
Right to Impartial Jury of the State
and District Wherein the Crime Shall
Have Been Committed
The right to an impartial jury promises:
• that the jury will be unbiased.
• that there will be a jury trial.
Right to Impartial Jury of the State
and District Wherein the Crime Shall
Have Been Committed
The Supreme Court has interpreted this to
mean that defendants charged with felonies or
with misdemeanors punishable by more than
six months’ imprisonment are entitled to a
jury trial.
Right to be Informed of the Nature
and Cause of the Accusation
The right to notice and a hearing is the very
core of what is meant by due process.
This right prevents the practice, common in
some countries, of holding suspects
indefinitely without telling them why they are
being held.
Right to Confront
Opposing Witnesses
Defendants have the right to:
• be present during their trials, and
• cross-examine witnesses against them.
Defendants can forfeit this right by disrupting
the trial.
Right to Compulsory Process for
Obtaining Favorable Witnesses
Defendants have the right to use the
subpoena power of the court to compel the
testimony of any witnesses who may have
information useful to the defense.
Right to Counsel
The right to hire a privately retained lawyer
did not exist in state courts until 1954.
Right to Counsel
In federal courts, defendants who could not
afford an attorney went without until 1938
when the Supreme Court first required the
government to provide an attorney for a
defendant facing felony charges. The right to
an attorney paid for by the government was
extended to state courts in 1963 (Gideon v.
Wainwright).
The Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive
fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments
inflicted.
Protection Against Excessive
Bail and Fines
The Eight Amendment does not require that
bail be granted to all suspects or defendants.
Protection Against Cruel and
Unusual Punishments
The definition of cruel and unusual punishment
was changed in 1910. The Supreme Court
determined that:
• The meaning of the Eight Amendment is not
restricted to the intent of the Framers.
• The Eight Amendment bars punishments that are
excessive.
• What is excessive is not fixed in time but changes
with evolving social conditions.
Protecting the Accused from
Miscarriages of Justice
The legal system of the U.S. is unique in the
world in the number of procedural rights that
it provides people suspected or accused of
crimes.
However, people continue to be victims of
miscarriages of justice.
Protecting the Accused from
Miscarriages of Justice
A study of wrongful conviction determined that
0.5% of all felony convictions were in error.
Consider that in
2001, approximately
13.7 million people
were arrested in the
U.S.
That could mean
34,250 people
wrongfully
convicted.
Protecting the Accused from
Miscarriages of Justice
The most important factors contributing to
wrongful convictions are:
1. Eyewitness misidentification
2. Police errors
3. Prosecutorial errors
4. Guilty pleas made by innocent defendants who are
offered plea bargains or are mentally incompetent