between 1962 and 1967 the supreme court reviewed and decided on four court cases involving law enforcement officers and persons accused of criminal acts. what were the four cases and have the decisions affected law enforcement today?
im sorry but i really cant find the answer and it is due tomorrow. ):
what happened with the enforcement of the fugitive Act?
To answer your question, we need to follow a two-step process:
Step 1: Identify the four Supreme Court cases involving law enforcement officers and individuals accused of criminal acts between 1962 and 1967.
Step 2: Determine the impact of these cases on law enforcement practices today.
Step 1: Identifying the four cases:
To identify the specific cases, we can search for landmark Supreme Court cases during the given time frame that involve law enforcement and criminal acts. Here are the four cases that fit these criteria:
1. Mapp v. Ohio (1961):
This case actually falls slightly outside the given time frame, but it is essential to mention as it influenced subsequent decisions. Mapp v. Ohio involved the application of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule. The Court ruled that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions, extending the rule to state courts.
2. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963):
Gideon v. Wainwright dealt with the right to counsel. The Court held that individuals accused of a felony in state court have the right to an attorney, even if they cannot afford one. This decision significantly expanded the rights of defendants and guaranteed the hallowed principle of "equality before the law."
3. Miranda v. Arizona (1966):
Miranda v. Arizona established the now-famous "Miranda rights." The Court ruled that when individuals are taken into custody, they must be informed of their constitutional rights, such as the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. This decision aimed to protect individuals from self-incrimination during police interrogations.
4. Terry v. Ohio (1968):
Though slightly outside the given time frame, Terry v. Ohio is important to mention in understanding law enforcement practices today. The case dealt with "stop and frisk" searches. The Court held that police officers can briefly detain and pat down individuals under certain circumstances if they reasonably suspect criminal activity. This decision influenced law enforcement practices by allowing officers to conduct limited searches for their safety.
Step 2: Determining the impact on law enforcement practices:
The decisions in these cases have had significant and lasting effects on law enforcement practices today. Here are a few key impacts:
a. Exclusionary rule: Mapp v. Ohio reinforced the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule, which deters law enforcement from conducting illegal searches or seizures by rendering the obtained evidence inadmissible in court.
b. Right to counsel: Gideon v. Wainwright solidified the right to counsel for individuals facing criminal charges, ensuring that defendants who cannot afford an attorney receive legal representation.
c. Miranda rights: Miranda v. Arizona revolutionized police interrogations by requiring law enforcement officers to inform individuals of their rights to prevent coerced confessions and protect against self-incrimination.
d. Stop and frisk: Terry v. Ohio established the foundational principles for stop and frisk searches, allowing law enforcement officers to conduct brief detentions and searches based on reasonable suspicion, thereby promoting officer safety and crime prevention.
Overall, these cases have had a profound impact on law enforcement practices, ensuring the protection of individual rights and setting standards for the proper conduct of police officers when interacting with the public. It is important to note that the interpretation and application of these cases can evolve over time through subsequent court decisions.