Crime Control in a Constitutional Democracy. Chapter 1. Constitutional Democracy. We live in a constitutional democracy, whereneither a single dictator nor anoverwhelming majority of the people hastotal power.A majority of elected representatives have wide latitude to create criminal laws, but in enforcing the criminal law, officials are restricted by the law of criminal procedure. .
1. Criminal Procedure 7th Edition
2. Crime Control in a Constitutional Democracy Chapter 1
3. Constitutional Democracy We live in a constitutional democracy, where
neither a single dictator nor an
overwhelming majority of the people has
A majority of elected representatives have wide latitude to create criminal laws, but in enforcing the criminal law, officials are restricted by the law of criminal procedure.
4. Balancing Values in Constitutional Democracy Our constitutional democracy balances the
need to provide for the public’s safety and
security against other equally important
values—individual liberty, privacy, and
5. The Bill of Rights as a Code of Criminal Procedure The Bill of Rights limits the power of the
government to enforce criminal law by
guaranteeing the fair and equal
administration of criminal justice to
everybody, including criminal suspects,
defendants, and convicted offenders.
6. The Fourteenth Amendment Two clauses in the Fourteenth Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution guarantee fairness
“Due process of the law”
“Equal protection of the laws”
7. Balancing Values in Criminal Procedure At the heart of our constitutional democracy
is the difficult task of balancing values:
Community security vs. individual autonomy
Ends vs. means
8. Community Security and Individual Autonomy The objective of community security is the
feeling of safety in the community. The
objective of individual autonomy is being
able to control one’s own life.
Community security and individual autonomy are equally important.
Striking balance is difficult and doesn’t satisfy everyone.
Balance is flexible, falling within a zone.
9. Ends and Means The balance between ends and means is like
a balance between results and process.
Ends—the search for the truth to obtain the correct result in individual cases
Catching, convicting, and punishing the guilty
Freeing, as soon as possible, innocent people
Means—the commitment to fairness in dealing with suspects, defendants, and offenders
10. The History of Balancing Values Throughout the history of criminal justice,
the pendulum has swung between periods
of result and process.
When there was an excess of one, the pendulum swung back to the other.
In the 1960s The Warren Court tilted the balance toward process and individual rights in what came to be known as the due process revolution.
From the late 1960s to today, the pendulum is swinging back to result.
11. Balancing Values in Emergencies The balance between community security
and individual autonomy and between ends
and means has been tested during
emergencies, especially the “wars” on drugs
12. Equality Most of the history of criminal procedure,
especially state criminal procedure since the
Civil War, developed in response to racial
The search for justice also targets class, gender, ethnic, religious, and economic discrimination.
13. Discretion Understanding the importance of discretion
is key to understanding the values in our
society along with equality.
Discretion and law compliment each other in promoting and balancing interests.
Criminal process is a blend of formal law and informal influences.
14. Decision Making There are two types of decision making:
Formal decision making according to the law of criminal procedure
Discretionary decision making informally made by professionals based on their training and experience and unwritten rules.
Each step of the criminal justice process presents an opportunity to make judgment.
15. The Objective Basis Requirement Agents of crime control aren’t free to do
whatever they please. The objective basis
That every officially-triggered government restraint on the rights of individuals has to be backed up with facts.
The greater the limit, the more facts required to back it up (graduated objective basis requirement).
16. “Good” Evidence and “Bad” Methods The exclusionary rule forces courts to throw
out “good” evidence if the government got it
by “bad” methods.