Should illegally seized evidence be excluded from trial


Assignment:

Criminologist Herbert Packer's assembly line concept finds that although there are many people who commit crime and are arrested and charged, only about 21 adults are incarcerated for every 1000 serious crimes committed. Additionally, 80 percent of all felony cases and over 90 percent of misdemeanors are settled without trial.

On the other hand, over time, the Supreme Court has been diminishing the scope of the exclusionary rule. This normally excludes improperly obtained evidence by permitting more exceptions, thus allowing more "improperly obtained evidence" into court. For example, evidence is now admissible in court if the police officers acted in good faith by first obtaining court approval for their search, even if the warrant they received was deficient or faulty. This has come to be known as the good faith exception.

Based on your understanding from the readings, and keeping in mind the due process and crime control models, write a 2 to 3 page paper in which you discuss:

1. Have criminals been given too many rights by the courts?

2. Should courts be more concerned with the rights of victims or the rights of the offenders?

3. Should illegally seized evidence be excluded from trial, even though it is conclusive proof of a person's criminal acts?

Use your textbook and at least two (2) quality resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar websites do not qualify as quality resources.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Explain the development of American courts and illustrate the concept of the dual-court system.
  • Distinguish between the various courtroom participants and describe the stages in a criminal

Solution Preview :

Prepared by a verified Expert
Business Law and Ethics: Should illegally seized evidence be excluded from trial
Reference No:- TGS03022083

Now Priced at $40 (50% Discount)

Recommended (91%)

Rated (4.3/5)