POSC 130g 1st Edition Lecture 5 Current Lecture Law firms are organized through hierarchy students learn to accept an inferior position Large law firms don t have the same degree of influential as the years before Often times lawyers will take cases pro bono Lawyers will take on cases for the greatness of the people do it for the good of the people do not get paid and have the resources to take on a class action A lot of lawyers want to become judges Police crime control versus due process Herbert Packer s model Department policies rulebooks reports Technology ensures the police are in contact with supervisors Police forces report to different supervisors city police controlled by mayor state police controlled by governor etc No common policy each force can set its own policies Different cities target different things When there is an election showing crime is under control is important No special education Historically in the US there is a family tradition male operation perhaps on aggression and physical force Police are more fearful if they don t know the community that they are enforcing causing tension in some communities Policing tends to be reactive Police may decide to go after some particular prime set up a sting operation to catch people Entrapment the issue that the police go a little too far refers to a situation where the police leads someone to commit a crime that the person wouldn t otherwise commit The act of officers enduing someone to commit a crime but the mere act of an officer enfurnishing accused an opportunity to commit a crime in which the criminal intent was already present in the accused mind is not ordinarily entrapment Issue lots of cases where people are influenced by the police to do stuff question is whether the police manipulated them Has our legal system and the way the Supreme Court analyzes different issues moved in a direction that we award the police more power and reduce the limits on their conduct Is there a good balance of due process and individual rights vs policies To what extent do Supreme Court decisions reflect due process Procedural due process due process clause requires no person should be denied life and liberty without due process of law Requirements of due process get changed regularly but the basic notion is more or less fixed The core idea is that a person should have fair notice a chance to present his her in court and due process also means that there shouldn t be any procedure that is unfair or arbitrary Some of the specific aspects include counsel trial by jury transcript of court proceedings the right to question adverse witnesses etc Interrogations 1 What interrogation techniques are acceptable a Under US Constitutional Law can be subjected to body searches even brutality by the police called the third degree the conditions may be surprising for jail mates b Under International human rights law 2 Have public policies evolved to promote efficiency or fairness The rights that people have under the constitution only apply to governmental institutionscan t be applied towards private setting Can a coerced confession be used Landmark Cases 1 Brown v Mississippi 1936 allowed a coerced confession to not be used first time based on the 15th amendment due process clause third degree 2 Malloy v Hogan 1964 due process applies to the states 15th amendment applied to state 3 Escobedo v Illinois Confession obtained in violation of 6th amendment can t be used Miranda v Arizona 1 Famous police warnings 2 2 requirements a suspect must be interrogated b the subject must be in custody 3 Nemo tenetur seipsum accusare meaning of privilege against self incriminations Must warn suspects before interrogating them about their rights The person has to be in custody and in interrogation Miranda was a 23 year old Mexican who was living in Arizona and completed education in the 8th grade He had several problems and the police asked him to go to the police station He participated in a lineup the lady said that was the man who attacked him but she wasn t sure The detectives misinformed him and said that the lady successfully identified him but only through his voice Miranda was asked if that was the girl in 1953 and Miranda identified the girl and he complied with the request to say what happened in writing He went through a two hour interrogation and he wasn t told he had the right to have an attorney present or anything The evidence he said was used to put him behind bars 60 years total for kidnapping and rape Supreme Court took the case after 6 years of Miranda being in jail The case raised questions about juris prudence it should be consistent with the Constitution He was subjected to police manipulation The person should not be required to engage in self incrimination If the person is allowed to remain silent the court said that it is an absolute requisite for interrogation Miranda warnings had to be given to the person being interrogated and if the person was in custody Erosion of Miranda 1 What counts as interrogation Rhode Island v Innis 1980 officers were driving near a place with students and tricked the person in the car that was being arrested to show where the gun was He said it was in violation of the Miranda rights Supreme Court didn t agree because the officers didn t know that the conversation was likely to illicit an incriminating response The officers didn t know he was religious or care about children If the question is if the prisoner isn t in direct conversation with the police and the police are talking is that in violation of the Miranda case Brewer v Willians 1977 Nix v Williams 1984 Girl disappeared and thought Williams was involved Williams was in Iowa which was 160 miles away and talked to the lawyer The lawyer said not to talk Williams goes to the police station and there was a local lawyer that asked to be in the car The police and Williams are going in the car and gave the Christian burial speech They knew he was religious told him to observe the weather conditions and he knew where the little girl s body was He told Williams that he should think about it but not tell them Then as they get close he tells them to stop and tells them where the body was The court did this that the evidence had been violated Some thought Williams had the right to counsel but waived it The US Supreme Court didn t think he waived his rights and he should have a new trial When the ward holding the prisoner changes that s why the name changed