REVIEW: Which kind of law (Criminal or civil)? Rape– Child custody– Divorce–

REVIEW: Which kind of law (Criminal or civil)?

Rape– Child custody– Divorce– Disrupt social order – Relationship conflict-Murder-Family Law-Identity theft-Government goes after you-People sue each other-

Review: Match the following words with the correct theory for punishment (retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation)

-Get an “eye for an eye”--Prevent future crimes--Reeducate prisoners--Afraid to commit a crime--Become better person--Receive counseling-

4. What theory do you think is BEST in explaining why we punish criminals (retribution, deterrence, or rehabilitation) and WHY?

Read the Lyrics on the next slide and respond to the questions below

them

1. What is happening to the person rapping this song?2. How does this person act when the cop pulls them over? Why?3. Do you know who the artist is for this song? Do you know the title of the song?

The year is '94 and in my trunk is raw, In my rear view mirror is the m***** f***** law, I got two choices yall pull over the car or bounce on the double put the pedal to the floor, Now I ain't trying to see no highway chase with jake, Plus I got a few dollars I can fight the case, So I...pull over to the side of the road, And I heard "Son do you know why I'm stopping you for?” Cause I'm young and I'm black and my hats real low; Do I look like a mind reader sir, I don't know. Am I under arrest or should I guess some mo? "Well you was doing fifty five in a fifty four” "License and registration and step out of the car,” "Are you carrying a weapon on you, I know alot of you are.” I ain't stepping out of s*** all my papers legit. "Do you mind if I look round the car a little bit?” Well my glove compartment is locked so is the trunk and the back. And I know my rights so you gon' need a warrant for that. "Aren't you sharp as a tack or some type of lawyer or something?” "Or somebody important or something?” Nah I ain't pass the bar but I know a little bit. Enough that you won't illegally search my s****. "Well see how smart you are when the K-9's come"

Rights of the Accused in Bill of Rights

-There are 5 key amendments in the Bill of Rights that are meant to protect individuals who are accused of crimes and how they are treated

1. How many amendments are there in the Bill of Rights?

4th Amendment=no “unreasonable search or seizure” Your property may not be searched without a warrant

*Reasonable: You must have some sort of valid suspicion

What is the trick to remembering the 4th amendment?

Have you ever heard of this before?

“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?”

What is this?

5th Amendment=the right of due process and protection against double jeopardy and self-incrimination Due process=a free, fair, and public trial

-Why is it important to have due process? Why couldn’t a judge interrogate someone in private room to decide their fate?

Double JeopardyTo be put in jeopardy

means to face a great, dangerous threat (like being accused of a crime) Self-Incrimination

To incriminate someone is to accuse someone

5. What do you think double jeopardy means?

6. What do you think self-incrimination means?

6th Amendment=you have a right to a speedy trial and an attorney if you can’t afford one

7th Amendment=you have a right to a trial by jury

-Why is it important to have an attorney during a trial? Why is it important to have a speedy trial? 8-How do you remember the difference between the 6th and the 7th amendments…

8th Amendment=when you are punished for your crimes, you many not face a cruel or unusual punishment (like an excessively high fine or bail)

9. What is bail?

10. What would be an example of a cruel and unusual punishment if someone ran a red light? What would be an acceptable punishment?

Amendment Quick Practice4th 5th 6th 7th 8th

I can burn the

Bible or the

Koran

Cops need a warrant I plead the 5th! I get an attorney I get a jury

I can’t be tried for

the same crime

twice

I can wear a “I hate

Obama” T-shirt

I don’t have to let

my purse get

searched

My dad’s bail

can’t be set at $1

million dollars for

petty theft

I am too poor,

the state

appoints me a

lawyer

going 5 mph over,

can’t get a

$10,000 fine

The cops pull me

over, but can’t open

my trunk

I can protest at a

funeral, as long as

I don’t harm

My trial has to be

in public!

I don’t have to

tell on myself!

Other Americans

get called up for

jury duty

You have the right

to remain silent!

I can burn the

American flag!

I get a speedy

trial

My arm can’t

be chopped off

for jaywalking

Read the descriptions of the cases and fill in the chart below.

Case Name Case Issue Illustration or Description

Amendment Involved My opinion: Who should win and

WHY!

Mapp v. Ohio

Miranda v. Arizona

Gideon v. Wainwright

New Jersey v. T.L.O.

Mapp Vs. Ohio (1961)

Mapp Vs. Ohio (1961)Suspicious that Dollree Mapp might be hiding a person suspected in a bombing, the police went to her home in Cleveland, Ohio. They knocked on her door and demanded entrance, but Mapp refused to let them in because they did not have a warrant. After observing her house for several hours, the police forced their way into Mapp's house, holding up a piece of paper when Mapp demanded to see their search warrant. As a result of their search, the police found a trunk containing pornographic materials. They arrested Mapp and charged her with violating an Ohio law against the possession of obscene materials. At the trial the police officers did not show Mapp and her attorney the alleged search warrant or explain why they refused to do so. Nevertheless, the court found Mapp guilty and sentenced her to jail. After losing an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, Mapp took her case to the U.S. Supreme Court.


Amendment Involved My opinion: Who should win

and WHY! Mapp v. Ohio

Suspicious that Dollree Mapp might be hiding a person suspected in a bombing, the police went to her home in Cleveland, Ohio. They knocked on her door and demanded entrance, but Mapp refused to let them in because they did not have a warrant. After observing her house for several hours, the police forced their way into Mapp's house, holding up a piece of paper when Mapp demanded to see their search warrant. As a result of their search, the police found a trunk containing pornographic materials. They arrested Mapp and charged her with violating an Ohio law against the possession of obscene materials. At the trial the police officers did not show Mapp and her attorney the alleged search warrant or explain why they refused to do so. Nevertheless, the court found Mapp guilty and sentenced her to jail. After losing an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court, Mapp took her case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Case Verdict: Who won? Why?

Mapp v. Ohio

Mapp The police violated her 4th amendment right to

unreasonable search and seizure and used that

illegal information in the court

THE VERDICTS…

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)Ernesto Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him, but police officers questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, or of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of an attorney. While he confessed to the crime, his attorney later argued that his confession should have been excluded from trial. The Supreme Court agreed, deciding that the police had not taken proper steps to inform Miranda of his rights.


Amendment Involved

My opinion: Who should win

and WHY!

Miranda v. Arizona

Ernesto Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him, but police officers questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, or of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of an attorney. While he confessed to the crime, his attorney later argued that his confession should have been excluded from trial. The Supreme Court agreed, deciding that the police had not taken proper steps to inform Miranda of his rights.


Miranda v.

Arizona

Miranda Because police did not read him his rights. Every

person has to right to know what they are being

arrested for.

THE VERDICTS…

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)In June 1961, a burglary occurred at the Bay Harbor Pool Room in Panama City, FL. Police arrested Clarence Earl Gideon after he was found nearby with a pint of wine and some change in his pockets. Gideon, who could not afford a lawyer, asked a Florida Circuit Court judge to appoint one for him arguing that the Sixth Amendment entitles everyone to a lawyer. The judge denied his request and Gideon was left to represent himself. He did a poor job of defending himself and was found guilty of breaking and entering and petty larceny (theft). While serving his sentence in a Florida state prison, Gideon began studying law, which reaffirmed his belief his rights were violated when the Florida Circuit Court refused his request for counsel. From his prison cell, he handwrote a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case and it agreed.


Amendment Involved


and WHY!


In June 1961, a burglary occurred at the Bay Harbor Pool Room in Panama City, FL. Police arrested Clarence Earl Gideon after he was found nearby with a pint of wine and some change in his pockets. Gideon, who could not afford a lawyer, asked a Florida Circuit Court judge to appoint one for him arguing that the Sixth Amendment entitles everyone to a lawyer. The judge denied his request and Gideon was left to represent himself. He did a poor job of defending himself and was found guilty of breaking and entering and petty larceny (theft). While serving his sentence in a Florida state prison, Gideon began studying law, which reaffirmed his belief his rights were violated when the Florida Circuit Court refused his request for counsel. From his prison cell, he handwrote a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case and it agreed



Gideon The judge violated his 6th amendment right for

counsel

THE VERDICTS…

New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)

New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)A New Jersey high school student was accused of violating school rules by smoking in the bathroom, leading an assistant principal to search her purse for cigarettes. The vice principal discovered marijuana and other items that implicated the student in dealing marijuana. The student tried to have the evidence from her purse suppressed, contending that mere possession of cigarettes was not a violation of school rules; therefore, a desire for evidence of smoking in the restroom did not justify the search. The Supreme Court decided that the search did not violate the Constitution and established more lenient standards for reasonableness in school searches.


Amendment Involved


and WHY!


A New Jersey high school student was accused of violating school rules by smoking in the bathroom, leading an assistant principal to search her purse for cigarettes. The vice principal discovered marijuana and other items that implicated the student in dealing marijuana. The student tried to have the evidence from her purse suppressed, contending that mere possession of cigarettes was not a violation of school rules; therefore, a desire for evidence of smoking in the restroom did not justify the search. The Supreme Court decided that the search did not violate the Constitution and established more lenient standards for reasonableness in school searches.



New Jersey Because the school was not violated her rights. In

the school it is constitutional for school

officials to search students to help ensure the safety of

the student body.

THE VERDICTS…

Think: What case is being described? Search and seizure in schools okay-_____________________________

students rights taken away-_____________________________

right to remain silent-_____________________________

Illegal search and seizure-_____________________________

right to an attorney-_____________________________

5th amendment-_____________________________ 4th amendment violated-_____________________________

“reasonable suspicion” ok-_____________________________

6th amendment-_____________________________

4th amendment not violated-_____________________________

After you finish…• 1. Complete the Worksheet• 2. Write a letter from any of the defendants

we have spoken about today, to the Supreme Court. This letter must include the background of the case, and why the defendant wants to appeal their case to the Supreme Court. It must also include what amendment was being violated…be creative!

REVIEW: Which kind of law (Criminal or civil)? Rape– Child custody– Divorce–

Documents

Transcript of REVIEW: Which kind of law (Criminal or civil)? Rape– Child custody– Divorce–