Article Review: Constitutional Law And The Criminal Justice System

Why is the death penalty used as a means of punishment for crime? Is this just a way to solve the nations growing problem of overcrowded prisons, or is justice really being served? Why do some view the taking of a life morally correct? These questions are discussed and debated upon in every state and national legislature throughout the country. Advantages and disadvantages for the death penalty exist, and many members of the United States, and individual State governments, have differing opinions. Yet it seems that the stronger arguments, and evidence such as cost effectiveness, should lead the common citizen to the opposition of Capital Punishment.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

Since the beginning of time, the United States’ Criminal Justice System (CJS) has been scrutinized and will continue to be. If significant changes were to occur within the CJS it could potentially take decades. Different persons, institutions, governments, and even departments within governments have different views; it is a natural occurrence. Thus, as with any subject matter, there are always controversies that cause disruption within society. Often, the controversies stem from the lack of understanding and the historical patterns of unsupported data.

Offenders going through the criminal justice system have many obstacles they will face. The United States Constitution contains rights for offenders which allows their process through the criminal justice system to be smoother and make sure they are being treated fairly. I will cover the impact of the United States Constitution for the offender in the criminal justice system. This will include the fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and fourteenth amendments as well as due process for offenders.

Chapter 11 Article 1 The Supreme Court could soon deliver a crushing blow to the Sixth Amendment

Therefore, we will take a look at one of the U.S. Supreme Court case (Gerald “Jerry” Gault) in regards to a juvenile right to consul. Then this learner will briefly discuss the case, the decision, and impact on today 's criminal justice system. After which, the discussion will state if source for this case is primary or secondary and what implications that may have for that case.

At trial, the resolution of disputed facts is guided by constitutional guarantees of confrontation and rules of evidence that limit inadmissible and irrelevant information. However many of these protections have been removed, abridged, and ignored at sentencing effectively changing the role of the judiciary in an adversarial system. Since the imposition of sentencing guidelines, an equally critical part of the criminal system has become the sentencing phase which has evolved to become a trial in its own right when its purpose is to address and resolve factual inaccuracies in the PSR. Without the same formalities of trail, the disregard of adversarial protections becomes especially troubling when the PSR primarily serves as evidence enhancing sentencing.

When it comes to the United States, (U.S), the majority of the American people love their seconded amendment rights. As stated in the textbook, Constitutional Law and the Criminal Justice System by J. Scott Harr, Karen M. Hess, Christine Orthmann, the second amendment of the United States Constitution, for the most part, protects the U.S. citizens rights to “keep and bear arms” (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 167). That being said, each state in the U.S. will vary in their firearms laws. For instance, some states make it easier for their residence to purchase or use a firearm; other states may have stricter laws that require a more scrutinized screening process. To be more specific, most states vary in elements, such as the exceptions to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, the waiting period on purchasing firearms; if someone needs a license to own or purchase a gun; if registration is required; and if a record of the firearm sales is sent to the local police. Other factors that will differ from state to state would include, if some firearms are permitted or not allowed to be sold or owned by a state, the concealed carry laws, hunter protection laws; range protection laws, and finally, not all states have firearm injury lawsuit preemption.

The criminal justice system is a complex and often uncoordinated system that operates by enforcing the law and seeking justice across countless jurisdictions. It is comprised of many separate agencies including agencies at the federal, state, and local level. Each agency has its own function and goals while operating at different levels of government. The agencies also represent different concerns and values of the public, creating a fragmented system rather than a monolithic, unified system. A monolithic system would deny the reality that justice in a rural area might not be justice in an urban area. To create a unified system would require our complex society to determine a common set of values and goals (Wright, 1981). It is seemingly impossible that a common set of goals or values would ever be agreed upon by the entire society. Therefore a range of goals and values are represented throughout the separate yet intertwined agencies that comprise the criminal justice system.

The United States criminal justice system has an extensive history that can be traced as far as the colonial period. Our founding forefathers placed great emphasis in creating laws that would safeguard the protection of people in the free world resulting in the development of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Although the Constitution and Bill of Rights remain as the standing living document of how laws are fundamentally interpreted and applied, the procedures from which justice is carried out has drastically changed over the past 200 years. The justice system through state and federal levels as it stands today is held to the highest standards for imposing justice on those who commit criminal acts or break the law while simultaneously

From 1976 to March of 2015 1,392 people have been killed by the death penalty. The number of inmates on death row has reached over 3,000 (“Death Penalty Statistics”). These numbers show a hypocritical side of America. This is the part of American that focuses on “an eye for an eye” rather than on our constitution and its standpoint on cruel and unusual punishment. This idea that criminals need to get what they deserve through the death penalty is what can cloud people's judgment and waste the taxpayer’s money. The death penalty is a misguided form of punishment that should not be used in United States justice system.

In America many people believed that death penalty was the constitutional ban against cruel and unusual punishment and the guarantees of due process of law and of equal protection under the law. Now, we believe that the state should not give itself the right to kill human beings – especially when it kills with happiness and with ceremony, in the name of the law or in the name of its people, and now we could vote if there could be death penalty.

This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s

The Death Penalty law in the United States continues to be a very controversial topic that will heavily be debated for a long time to come, which is one of the main reasons why I am so interested in it. Since the beginning of time, there has always been a sort of rules connecting punishment to people who break the law. Almost every nation around the world either has a form of capital punishment currently or once practiced it at one point in time. America’s death penalty first came about in 1608 and is still practiced, to some extent, today.

The death penalty has been a huge part of many political debates for decades. Most citizens of the Unite States believe there are two sides, those for and those against its continued use. Those for, tend to believe that it is necessary to keep these criminals out of society and that it deters crime, while those against tend to believe that the practice is medieval and unethical in society today. With a controversial topic like the death penalty, it is important to determine why this controversy exists and if there is a possible solution. The focus at hand is whether or not the United States Government should continue its use of the death penalty and how this answer could be implemented.