Criminal Law Foundations Evaluation If laws were not in place, individuals could not hold onto their individual properties. Social life would be impossible without laws to help control the way people behave, think and treat each other while in public and private locations. Criminal laws were designed to reflect the accepted behavior in a community, such as morals and the criminal act itself, or Mens Rea and Actus Reus. Thus when people break the law and are caught, the accused are provided certain constitutional rights. Criminal law consists of bodies of regulations and rules that will specify and define the punishments for the wrong committed against society or the state.
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,
Police Powers in the Public Services P1 – describe the difference between arrest with and without a warrant M1 – explain the requirements of lawful arrest and detention D1 – evaluate the powers of arrest, detention and search There is a legal right that allows UK citizens to arrest another person. This law is given under Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), 1984. In order to carry out a citizen’s arrest, there are certain rules that say when you can and cannot make an arrest. If you have suspicions that someone has committed a crime, these suspicions are not enough, no matter how strong they are. You could find yourself getting into trouble with the police if you carry out an arrest that is incorrect.
The “due process” and the “crime control” models both have to follow a protocol, regulations, and laws as described by the United States Constitution. Regardless of the approach, it is followed either by “due process”, or by the crime control model, the laws and Amendments must ensure the same approach effectively and consistently (Zalman, 2008). Both models have other differences as well. For example, the “due process” model provides that law enforcement within the criminal justice system is important to ensuring appropriate justice within society. While the “crime control” model contemplates that, the criminal justice system has an adverse consequence and progressively stops the process of arresting people within the criminal justice system.
Second, a prosecution must then involve the same offense. Last, the prosecutions must be given by the same government entity. The federal and state government are separate sovereign entities, each entity have the power to prosecute for violations of their laws. This leads into the first question, “..why under certain circumstances a state trial and a federal trial may be held for the murder of the same person without violating the double jeopardy clause..” This answer is found within the dual sovereign doctrine. It states that the Constitution forbids being placed twice for the same crime, you cannot be placed in double jeopardy by the same sovereign, by the same government.
It obliged states to ensure that anyone ''who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of [terrorism] . . . or [supports] terrorist acts is brought to justice.'' The resolution insisted that ''such terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws .
Constitution protects citizens against unreasonable search and seizures by law enforcement officers. This right applies to juveniles and adults. In 1967, the Supreme Court ruled during the State v. Lowry case juveniles should not receive worse treatment from law enforcement officers than adults (Burfeind & Bartusch, 2011). To search a suspect of any age police must have a warrant and probable cause. Special circumstances may apply when a warrant is unnecessary.
Not every crime should be subject to double jeopardy. Robbery, traffic offenses, divorce suits, and minor assault cases should remain protected from double jeopardy. Only the crimes where society is at a serious risk, and new and compelling evidence is brought to light for those serious crimes, should there be a retrial of an acquitted person. In 2006, there were new rules on double jeopardy that were put into force which scored a first conviction. ( Economist) “Pressure for a change in the law came after an official inquiry into the murder in 1993 of Stephen Lawrence, a black London schoolboy, found that the principle of double jeopardy would cause “grave injustice to victims and the community” (Economist).
A writ of habeas corpus is a directive from a court requiring the government to justify the imprisonment of a citizen. Because of the writ of habeas corpus guarantee, an individual cannot be held for more than a short period of time without being formally charged with a crime. (McNamara, 2010) The Due process clause also affords the accused of the right to trial by a jury of ones peers. These case are handled so that in a federal proceeding formal charges can not be levied without a grand jury hearing where an indictment must be issued. The jury trial and grand jury guarantees are intended to protect private citizens from over-zealous police officers, prosecutors and judges.
The Homeland Security department is there to investigate and bring to justice anyone who breaks these laws, foreign or domestic. USA Patriot Act The purpose of the Patriot Act is to discourage and discipline known terrorist and their actions in the United States and its partners. It also enhances police investigatory equipment. The USA Patriot Act states as its purpose: “1) To strengthen U.S. measures to prevent, detect and prosecute international money laundering and financing of terrorism; 2) To subject to special scrutiny foreign jurisdictions, foreign financial institutions, and classes of international transactions or types of accounts that are susceptible to criminal abuse; 3) To require all appropriate elements of the financial services industry to report potential money laundering; 4) To strengthen measures to prevent use of the U.S. financial system for personal gain by corrupt foreign officials and facilitate repatriation of stolen assets to the citizens of countries to whom such assets belong” (FinCin, 2012, pg.