CJ-207 Assignment 6-2 Template: Landmark Cases
Complete the following template by replacing the bracketed text with your responses
Case Name: New Jersey v. T.L.O.
Summary: The Supreme Court addressed the issue of students' Fourth Amendment rights in public schools. A high school student, T.L.O., was caught smoking in the bathroom, and the assistant principal searched her purse for evidence. The search led to the discovery of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. The Court ruled that while students have reduced privacy rights in schools,
searches conducted by school officials must still be reasonable. The decision established the "reasonable suspicion" standard for searches in schools, allowing officials to search students if
they have a reasonable belief that a search will uncover evidence of a violation of school rules or laws.
Impact of the case:
In terms of impact, New Jersey v. T.L.O. significantly affected the policy, procedure, and practice of criminal justice within educational settings. The decision clarified that school officials do not need to obtain a warrant or meet the same strict standards as law enforcement officers when conducting searches in schools. This ruling recognized the unique balance between students' privacy interests and the need to maintain a safe and orderly educational environment. As a result, schools across the US adopted policies and procedures that aligned with the "reasonable suspicion" standard, allowing for searches that are reasonable in scope and justified by specific and articulable facts.
Case Name: Miranda v. Arizona
Summary: This case established the requirement for law enforcement officers to inform suspects of their constitutional rights before interrogation. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape, and during the police interrogation, he confessed without being informed of his right to remain silent or have an attorney present. The Supreme Court decided that suspects must be informed of their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and their Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The "Miranda warning" became a fundamental part of the criminal justice system, ensuring that suspects are aware of their rights and can make an informed decision about whether to speak to law enforcement.
Impact of the case:
Similarly, Miranda v. Arizona had a profound impact on the policy, procedure, and practice of criminal justice. The Court's ruling established the requirement for law enforcement to provide
suspects with the Miranda warning before any custodial interrogation. This decision ensured that individuals were aware of their rights and could exercise them during police questioning. As a result, police departments revised their interrogation protocols to include the Miranda warning, and suspects gained a clearer understanding of their rights. The case also led to the
