The civil tort suit is completely different and therefore does not fall under double jeopardy. Whether Armington is guilty or not guilty in the criminal trial Jennings can bring a civil suit against Armington to recover damages. Jennings was injured during the crime so he has the right to pursue a civil case to cover his injury. References Lectlaw.com (1995-2012). Double Jeopardy.
Prosecutors can sometimes get away with misconduct as it is extremely difficult to prove that misconduct had actually taken place. Often times the prosecutor is viewed as being on the side of justice and as a result it is difficult for the defendant (who is accused of a crime) to turn the tide against the prosecution. Although during the trial both the defense as well as the judge may report a prosecutor for misconduct, this rarely happens as these reports are often dismissed. This is because as long as the prosecutions misconduct does not affect the outcome of the case, then it is tolerated, meaning that a prosecutor can harass a witness or the defendant so long as the harassment did not have anything to do with the outcome of the trial. The fact that the prosecutor works in the interests of the state can be seen as the underlying factor here.
Yes, an individual should be punished for their crimes but the effects of a felony conviction should not include or affect that person’s right to vote, finding employment, or the pursuance of a higher education. According to Olivares, Burton, and Cullen (1996) upon release these offenders also deal with stigmas, loss of job opportunities, friendships, family relationships, and denial of civil rights. When it comes to the loss of job opportunities, a recent study has shown that most employers have hired at least one person with a felony conviction (Sawnson, Langfitt-Reese & Bond, 2012). Employers encourage job seekers with criminal records to be honest and willing to discuss their involvement with the justice system. Most employers did not have strict policies concerning hiring criminals and this is a plus.
They may, of course, be permitted to engage in certain authorized conduct that would be a crime if committed by regular citizens (such as the use of deadly force in appropriate circumstances). ● Civil lawsuits against government officials—the police, mainly—can be filed when neither the exclusionary rule nor other criminal remedies apply. Section 1983 litigation requires the plaintiff to show that a constitutional rights violation was committed by an official acting under color of state law. Section 1983 lawsuits can be filed against individual police officers, supervisors,
Since Mapp and other significant decisions, innocent people have been subjected to fewer unconstitutional searches, not necessarily because the police fear the exclusion of evidence but because of the potential for civil liability, citizen complaints, and the like. The rules of law decided in Mapp v. Ohio relate to the relevant facts in the fact pattern based on the Fourth Amendment violation. Det. Quickdraw is a representative for the government, but he failed to uphold the law by not following the correct criminal procedure for search and seizure. In conclusion, if I were the judge ruling in this case, I could apply the exclusionary rule and any evidence that was obtained during the unlawful search would not be admissible.
In criminal defense cases there can be several type of defense types which are used in order to try and convince the jury and judge that the defendant is not guilty of his/her crime. Some types of common criminal defenses are that of The Insanity Defense, The Affirmative Criminal, Coercion and Duress, Abandonment or withdrawal and many others as well. Criminal defenses are not the types of options that just come up but instead there are the factors that all defendant attorneys work towards for their client so that they can prevent a guilty verdict upon the case. All criminal defenses are constructed so that an argument(s) can be created upon the prosecuting attorneys, so that no charges fall against or go through to the accused defendant. Criminal defense of insanity is one type of popular strategy which is tried to be used by many criminal offenders whom are found to be guilty of their crimes or are about to fall within law’s hands.
Within the due process one may not be treated cruel, unfair or be given unreasonable treatment. Every accused person is entitled to fair procedures, and the due process applies to the criminal justice system as the trials, parole hearings, and administrative hearings. Due process main goal is to protect the innocent from being wrongfully convicted but may be looked upon as focusing on the rights of the accused and ignoring the rights of the victims. Crime control model is taken back a little and is the complete opposite of Due Process Model, which the crime control model focuses on the initial arrest, prosecution, and the conviction of a criminal. Due process priorities stand with protecting an
In other crime types once the intent is created it is followed by the execution of the act. The intent and act is not misinterpreted. In contrast, due to the element of disguise in white-collar crime the intent is blurred and frequently can only be obtained by interpretation. (Stephen Rosoff, 2010) White-collar criminals can only be successful if the victim is ignorant and negligent. Key differences between white-collar crime and other types of crime is that white-collar crime generally requires the victim to comply in being victimized in contrast to murder, robbery, assault or rape.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.