Kim Miller 908 399 8386 kmiller2@kaplan

2. Contact Information • Kim Miller 908 399 8386 • kmiller2@kaplan.edu

3. Unit 9 Final Essay • The US correctional system can serve two specific functions in relation to criminal offenders. First, it can serve as a tool for punishing the offender and making the offender pay for his/her crimes. Second, it can serve as a means to rehabilitating the offender and preparing him/her for successful reentry into society. • Write a 3-page paper that answers all 3 of the following questions: • How does our correctional system punish offenders? • How does our correctional system rehabilitate offenders? • Which method is more effective in reducing crime? Punishment or rehabilitation? Explain your choice.

4. Unit 9 Final Essay • You are required to use at least three (3) references for this paper. You are required to access the Kaplan Library for at least one of your references. Another reference can be your text from this class, and the third reference can come from an acceptable online academic resource. • Note: Wikipedia (and any of its related websites) is not an acceptable academic resource and may not be used for this paper. • Be sure to list your sources on your reference page. • Your paper must follow this format: • Page 1 – Cover page • Pages 2, 3 and 4 – Body of text • Page 5 – Reference page

6. The Fourth Amendment: Your Right To Be Secure • The Right to Privacy Learn about a 2005 case in which the police used a “sniffer” dog to search for illegal drugs during a routine traffic stop. • Learn about the privacy protections the Fourth Amendment provides and the circumstances under which the government can infringe upon your right of privacy. • Have You Been Seized? Use your knowledge to argue a case involving an alleged search and seizure violation.

7. The Fourth Amendment guarantees your right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures—in other words, it guarantees that you have rights to some sorts of privacy. As with First Amendment rights, Fourth Amendment rights are not absolute and are subject to judicial interpretation.

9. Caballes Pulled Over A Canine Alert • 1998: Roy Caballes clocked by state trooper driving 71 mph in a 65 mph zone • Caballes pulled over for speeding • Warrant check revealed no outstanding warrants, but that Caballes had been arrested twice for selling drugs • Second trooper with drug-sniffing dog arrived at scene • Dog walked around Caballes’s car, barked at trunk • Troopers opened trunk, found large quantity of marijuana • Caballes arrested for drug trafficking • Lawyer claimed drugs found as product of illegal search • Caballes convicted, sentenced to 12 years in prison Should authorities be able to search a car or home with “sniffer” dogs, or an electronic sensor? Neither method requires authorities to enter the car or building, so are these really searches? When, if ever, should they be legal?

10. The Court Hears Illinois v. Caballes • 2003, Illinois Supreme Court reversed Caballes’s conviction, said drug-sniffing dog at routine traffic stop violated Fourth Amendment rights • State appealed ruling to Supreme Court • 2004, Supreme Court hears Illinois v. Caballes • Government argued dog sniff not search, does not violate privacy • Justice Souter agreed not full-blown search but asked if it were constitutional, what would prevent police from walking dogs around every private home just to see if they get a “sniff of something” • Justice Scalia noted Court had ruled Fourth Amendment rights violated when police used thermal-imaging devices to see if people were growing marijuana in homes • Caballes’s attorney argued sniff was search, like scanner revealed something hidden from view; police had no reasonable suspicion to search car

12. 2005, Illinois v. Caballes: 6–2 decision—Court reversed Illinois Supreme Court, upheld Caballes’s conviction • Majority opinion: person has no legitimate privacy interest in possessing drugs or contraband • Government action indicating possession of contraband does not violate 4th Amendment privacy interests • Court agreed with state’s argument that dog sniff not a search • If traffic stop lawful, police had right to use sniffer dog • Dissenting opinions: dogs can be wrong as result of poor training, errors by handler, dog’s limited ability • Dog’s bark not probable cause • Justice Ginsburg: “every traffic stop could become an occasion to call in the dogs” • Worried Court decision could clear way for police with dogs to be stationed at long traffic lights, circling cars waiting for green lights

13. WHAT DO YOU THINK? 1. Is a trained dog’s sniff of someone or something a search of that person or thing? Explain why or why not. 2. Do you agree with the majority of the Court in the Caballes case or with the dissenting opinions? Explain why. 3. Would your opinion in the Caballes case be different if it had involved a bomb-sniffing dog instead? Explain why or why not.

14. Searches Seizures • Definition of search—any action by government to find evidence of criminal activity—very broad • Includes searching property, listening to phone conversations, stopping suspicious-looking persons and frisking for weapons • Seizure occurs when authorities keep something—an object, person • Police might seize item from home as evidence in a murder • Might take drugs or weapon from person stopped and frisked Understanding Search and Seizure The Fourth Amendment states that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, homes, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizure, shall not be violated.” This guarantee applies only to searches and seizures made by the government; it does not protect against unreasonable searches and seizures by private organizations or citizens. It did not apply to state governments until 1949, and the Supreme Court did not apply the exclusionary rule to state courts until 1961.

15. Unreasonable Searches Warrantless Searches • 4th Amendment bans unreasonable search and seizure • What is reasonable? • 1967: Katz v. United States, searchers must respect person’s right to privacy • Search warrant needed to look inside something • Must state what is being searched, what authorities are looking for • Some instances where warrant not required • Plain view doctrine: if object is in plain view, law assumes owner does not consider it private • Example—if police have warrant to search home for illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia is in plain view, it can be seized even though items not listed on warrant Probable Cause and Warrants To obtain a warrant—a court order to search for something or seize someone—there must be probable cause to believe the search will produce evidence of a crime, or that the person seized committed a crime.

18. Summarizing How are search and seizure related?

19. Answer(s): Authorities conduct searches for evidence of illegal activity, and if they find such evidence, they seize it for evidence.

20. Unsolved Crimes

22. On Thursday, May 26, 2005, Holloway and 124 fellow graduates of Mountain Brook High School, located in a wealthy suburb of Birmingham, Alabama, arrived in Aruba for a five-day, unofficial graduation trip. The graduates were accompanied by seven chaperones. According to teacher and chaperone Bob Plummer, the chaperones met with the students each day to ensure nothing was wrong.

23. One chaperone who organized the trip, stated, "the chaperones were not supposed to keep up with their every move. Police Commissioner Gerold Dompig, who would head the investigation from mid-2005 until 2006, described the behavior of the Mountain Brook students, stating there was "wild partying, a lot of drinking, lots of room switching every night. We know the Holiday Inn told them they weren't welcome next year. Natalee, we know, she drank all day every day. We have statements she started every morning with cocktails—so much drinking that Natalee didn't show up for breakfast two mornings“. Two of Holloway's classmates, Liz Cain and Claire Fierman, "agreed that the drinking was kind of excessive“.

24. Holloway was last seen by her classmates leaving the Aruban bar and night club Carlos'n Charlie‘s around 1:30 a.m. on Monday, May 30. Holloway left with 17-year-old Joran van der Sloot, a Dutch honors student living in Aruba and attending the Aruba International School,and his two Surinamese friends, 21-year-old Deepak Kalpoe and 18-year-old Satish Kalpoe,in Deepak Kalpoe's car.Holloway, who had been scheduled to fly home later on May 30, did not appear for her return flight, and her packed luggage and passport were found in her Holiday Inn room. Aruban authorities initiated searches for Holloway throughout the island and surrounding waters but did not find her.

25. The FBI watched interrogations and were given access to documents as well as taking statements from the students back home. • The FBI was on the ground within two days of Natalee's disappearance. • As Aruba is a sovereign nation, they had no official status but were allowed to watch interrogations, and a prosecutor flew over to the states to meet with them and show them the documents they had. • The FBI cooperated with the Aruban police force by questioning the students back in the U.S. and taking statements in addition to analyzing some forensics and the access to interrogations they had in Aruba. • Obviously there would not be equal jurisdiction, just as the Aruban or Dutch government would not have equal basis in investigating a crime in the states if the citizen was Dutch or Aruban

26. Unsolved Crimes • The Aruban police overlooked some evidence. The suspect was the son of a local lawyer. The youth said he drove Natalee with his two friends to a deserted beach. The police did not examine his car or search his home. The students said they drank heavily, the Aruban Deputy Police Chief said Natalie may have drunk too much alcohol or taken too many drugs and died on the beach, where someone buried her.

27. The psychological impact of cold cases, particularly disappearances, kidnappings, or murders, is overwhelming. Natalee Holloway’s mother Beth flew to Aruba with her husband and friends within hours of learning Natalee was missing. She worked with Aruba police to identify the men with whom Natalee was last seen, and to speak with one of them, Joran van der Sloot

28. In 2008 Van der Slott was arrested after saying he was involved in her death. Then he told Fox News he sold her into slavery. He retracted all of his statements.

29. Lingering Doubts • Van derSloot’s bizarre confessions and retractions have raised his profile as the prime suspect. Was his motive to confuse the police or just to get attention from the media? • How could Natalee completely disappear on the small island? Since Van derSloot and his friends had access to boats, was one used to dump her body at sea?

30. In the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, what is the evidence that points to murder without a body?

31. In the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, what is the evidence that points to murder without a body? • Only circumstantial. One myth is that blood was found in Deepak's car. In actuality a presumptive test showed possible blood, but when further analyzed in Holland it was actually cleaning fluid. Common cleaning fluids are one of the many things that will test positive for blood on the presumptive test. It CANNOT hide blood however, for years criminals have made the mistake of thinking that cleaning blood from crime scenes will hide it and discovered that it won't once it is examined in a lab. There has been rumor that a crab trap was missing from a fisherman's hut but this was never proven and it certainly has never been found, nor was any sign of Natalee found during a complete search of Joran's apartment discovered. Sadly, Natalee is still missing and this circumstance leads to the likelihood that she lost her life somehow, but who or what is not known. Hopefully one day there will be a resolution to this case for all concerned.

32. Lingering Doubts • Did the local police go easy on Van der Sloot because he was the son of an Aruban lawyer? • Why did Natalee go willingly with three strangers without notifying her classmates? Was she a victim of date rape drug?

33. If Van der Sloot received probation he would be getting a second chance? True False

34. Correct Answer • True

35. Pay fines, allow the probation officer to visit and stay employed apply to all probationers. They are __________ conditions of Van Der Sloot’s probation. Mandated General Specific Program - Orientated

36. Correct Answer 2. General

37. If Van Der Sloot was on probation or parole he must abide by conditions of supervision or risk losing the privilege to remain in the community. True False

38. Correct Answer 1. True

39. If Van Der Sloot was on probation, he would have been released from prison early on conditions. True False

40. Correct Answer 2. False

41. After looking at the statistics regarding parole, would you favor early release of Van Der Sloot’s taking into account his conduct while in prison or review by a parole board? Review by trained professional parole board members Statutory Decree No early release, offenders should serve entire sentence

42. Parole or probation revocation may result for Van Der Sloot from which of the following technical violations? Failure to meet with officer Failure to participate in treatment Drug or alcohol use All of the above are violations

43. Correct Answer 4. All of the above are violations

44. House arrest means a guard is posted at Van Der Sloot home rather than have him come and go as he pleases. True False

45. Correct Answer 2. False

46. In Bearden v Georgia Van Der Sloot must make restitution and pay all fines or risk going to prison on technical violations. True False

47. Correct Answer 2. False

48. Which intermediate sanction would require strict discipline, physical exercise, a short participation time and works mainly with first offenders such as Van Der Sloot? • Intensive Supervision • Boot Camp • Mixed Sentencing • Electronic Monitoring

49. Correct Answer 2. Boot Camp

50. Which of the following cases allows for Van Der Sloot to be represented by an attorney at a revocation hearing? Minnesota v Murphy Gagnon v Scarpelli Mempa v Rhay Morrissey v Brewer