CRJ 550Legal Issues in Criminal Justice AdministrationResear.docx

CRJ 550
Legal Issues in Criminal Justice Administration
Research Paper Guidelines
Your major writing requirement for this course will be due at
the end of Module 7. You will be provided with a number of
scenarios which give rise to a variety of legal issues. Your
assignment is to identify the legal issues in one of the scenarios,
research those issues, and make recommendations for
addressing those issues. This will really help you learn to write
and correctly document a research paper. And, if you feel you
already are an accomplished researcher and writer, it will
enhance your ability to perform research.
General Instructions
1. Technical The completed research paper should be typed in
MS Word only, Arial or Times New Roman, 12 pt font, double-
spaced format with footnotes and bibliographic references, not
less than 8 pages nor exceeding 12 pages in length. It will have
a minimum word count of 1750 words. This page requirement
does not include an abstract or bibliography page. Always check
for grammar, spelling, and proper citation before submitting
your work. It is expected that the student will devote a great
deal of initiative toward producing a quality product worthy of
the high academic standards established at Saint Leo University.
This research paper is worth 27 points and will represent 27%
of the final course grade.
This is not a personal opinion paper; all of it must be backed up
by your research. Your paper should cite those sources you are
relying on to formulate the pros and cons as well as your final
recommendations. Your paper should include a minimum of five
reference sources. These references can be five cases or five
journal articles or a combination of cases and articles.

As discussed in the syllabus, Saint Leo University uses Turnitin
to validate the originality of a student’s work. Turnitin is
integrated into the Research Paper Dropbox and your paper will
be assigned an originally score. Any papers with an originality
score of greater than 15% will be subject to an automatic score
of 0, as well as potentially subjecting to the student to referral
to the Academic Standards Committee for an academic integrity
review.
A tip:Do not wait until the last few days before the paper is due,
to submit it to the Dropbox. A paper may be resubmitted to the
Dropbox should the originality score be too high, provided it is
still before the final due date for the assignment.
Please note that your instructor is available to assist you at any
time. All you have to do is ask!
2. Background
You are the Special Assistant to the Saint Leo Chief of Police
(or, Saint Leo County Sheriff, as you prefer). As such, you are a
very trusted and dependable aide. The chief relies on you for
your good judgment, experience, and analytical abilities.
The Chief/Sheriff is fairly new to the Saint Leo Police
Department (SLPD/SLCSO). There are many problems in the
department, not all of which are the fault of this chief.
However, the Chief/Sheriff wants to address some of the more
pressing problems and resolve them, without litigation if
possible.
The Department’s General Counsel is involved in ongoing
litigation and is not available to provide guidance, and outside
counsel is expensive and premature at this point. The
Chief/Sheriff knows you are not an attorney, but you do have a
Master’s degree in Criminal Justice Administration from Saint
Leo University. The Chief/Sheriff knows that this respected

institution has educated you well for this task. Therefore, the
Chief/Sheriff needs your analysis of the facts and the relevant
law on the problems presented.
The various problems confronting the Chief/Sheriff can be
found at the end of this document. Be sure to notify your
professor by the conclusion of Module 2 as to the scenario you
are selecting.
3. Format
Your paper is to be structured as follows for each separate fact
situation you are researching. In your paper, put each of the
sub-headings listed below in bold, so that it is clear to the
reader that you are following the mandatory format:
a. Summary of Facts – This is a summary of the facts which are
relevant to the issue you are researching. You may add some
facts but only if they are necessary to your research.
b. Issues Presented – What legal issues are created by the facts
with which you are presented? The Sheriff usually presents
more than one.
c. Arguments Presented by Each Side – How many sides are
there? What is the best case for each side?
d. Applicable Law – This is where you describe the cases,
statutes, regulations, and other sources from your research
which are relevant to your issues. If some of the cases briefed in
the course apply to your issues, you may cite them. However,
you must also show that you have conducted independent
research and describe different cases which are relevant.
e. Recommendation – This is where you advise the Sheriff as to
what decisions should be made regarding the issues at hand.
f. Reasons – In this section, tell the Sheriff why you made those
recommendations. Remember, the Sheriff wants the legal basis
for your recommendations, NOT your personal opinions.
g. Core Values – In this section, describe the Saint Leo core
values which are implicated in the arguments presented by each

side and in your recommendations.
h. Bibliography – This should contain non-legal references
only. Legal case citations should be in footnotes in the body of
your paper; follow APA guidelines for citations.
Address each fact situation in your selected scenario separately
and write your advisory memorandum to the Sheriff, using each
of the sub-headings above. Then go on to the next fact situation
and repeat the format. The mandatory format is designed to
assist you with focusing on all of the issues while addressing
them as separate issues. Some may be easier to address than
others.
4. Grading Standards
a. Identification of Issues and Relevant Facts: ____/5 points
b. Organization (follows format): ____/5 points
c. Sources and Authorities (case law, statutes, scholarly journal
articles): ____/5 points
d. Mechanics and Writing Process (spelling, grammar, proper
citation, clarity of thought/writing): ____/5 points
e. Analysis (depth of analysis of the issues researched): ____/5
points
f. Core Value Integration: ____/2 points
5. Citation Format
The Sherriff wants to read your legal memo, not a bunch of text
citations, so put them in footnotes. APA provides for this. This
does not mean you should not have a well-researched memo,
with abundant citations; rather, it simply means you should put
your citations in footnotes.
As always, please feel free to contact the instructor at any time
if there are issues or questions!

Research Paper Problem Scenarios
Scenario #1:
The governor has just signed into law legislation which gives
police the authority to stop anyone in a car or on foot and make
inquiry if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that
the individual is an illegal immigrant. As you can imagine,
there is a lot of controversy over this new law. There are
challenges to similar laws in Arizona and Alabama and perhaps,
other states. The Sheriff wants you to do some research. Does
she have to enforce the law if it might be found unconstitutional
by an appellate court in the state? If she does enforce it, what
kind of training does she have to provide to officers when the
standard for a stop is so vague? What kinds of stops would be
legal or a violation of constitutional rights? What if an officer
refuses to enforce the law? What can the Sheriff do? If she took
some adverse employment action against the officer because of
his refusal to enforce the law, could the Sheriff be vulnerable to
a law suit? Finally, the community is up in arms. Some want the
law enforced because they believe that illegal immigration has
resulted in a loss of jobs. Some think that the law will lead to
numerous Fourth Amendment violations and racial profiling.
How does the Sheriff deal with all of her obligations as a law
enforcement administrator: to the department, to her officers,
and to the public in order to maintain the public’s confidence
and trust?
Scenario #2:
Officer Golden, one of the Sheriff’s best officers, told an
officer employed by the neighboring Hidden Valley Police
Department that he thought the Saint Leo Sheriff’s Department
had some bad actors. Officer Golden told this officer that he
thought some members of his department were lying on
affidavits in order to obtain search warrants and then taking a

portion of any illegal drug seized as the result of the execution
of the warrants and failing to inventory it. These statements got
back to the Sheriff who immediately transferred Officer Golden
to a desk job. Officer Golden had been a beat officer on the
force for ten years without any disciplinary problems. On the
transfer, he did not lose pay and it was not considered a
demotion. However, the Sheriff wanted Officer Golden to stop
talking outside the department as it was against department
rules to do so. A disciplinary letter was placed in Golden’s file.
Hidden Valley Police Department has obtained a copy of the
disciplinary letter. Officer Golden has threatened a lawsuit. The
Sheriff wants your advice on the merits of such a suit. Please
give her a sound legal basis and reasoning for your
recommendations.
After the Sheriff became aware of Officer Golden’s statements,
she initiated an investigation. She put video cameras in the
evidence room but didn’t tell anyone. She called in Internal
Affairs to interview everyone who had obtained search warrants
in the last two years and everyone who had made an arrest with
a drug charge during the same period. The Sheriff wants to
know what rights the officers who are questioned have in the IA
process. During the investigation, the video camera picked up
Officer Silver going into the evidence room and appearing to
add something to a bag of evidence that was already there. The
Sheriff believes that Officer Silver was concerned that the IA
investigation would show that he had kept some of the seized
drugs and was attempting to put them back before he got caught.
The Sheriff searched, without a warrant, Silver’s unlocked
office cubicle and his desk to see if there was any evidence of
criminal behavior. She didn’t find anything. Concerned,
however, with what she had heard from Officer Golden and
what she viewed on the video tape, the Sheriff summarily
terminated Officer Silver and now Officer Silver is suing the
department. Does Officer Silver have any valid claims? What
are they? Does the Sheriff have the right to terminate Silver as

she did? The Sheriff needs a sound legal basis for your analysis
and recommendations.
Scenario #3:
Officer Rowdy is a 36 year old, Jewish, divorced mother of two
who became a police officer after her divorce four years ago.
When she first started at the Saint Leo Police Department, she
was shunned by the male officers. Eventually, they warmed up
to her and credited her for her good work in the sexual assault
unit. She became “one of the boys.” Officer Rowdy uses
colorful language when hanging out with fellow officers in her
unit after hours. After a particularly brutal child sexual assault
investigation, she and fellow officers went to a local bar for a
few drinks and to decompress. They all got pretty drunk. The
men were referring to Officer Rowdy as a “jap” and laughing
about J-date, an internet dating service. Officer Rowdy’s
response was to joke about circumcised versus uncircumcised
males. She did not appear to be offended.
Officer Rowdy’s immediate supervisor was among them. He
told her on this occasion that if she wanted a promotion to the
detective division, he could get it for her, but that she needed to
do something sexual for him. She called him several derogatory
names and he left her alone, but not before he called her a
“disgusting Jew.”
A week later, a neighbor of the bar where the officers were
drinking reported to the Sheriff that her officers were an
embarrassment to the town and that there was one female officer
who was particularly offensive because she was using foul
language and telling sexually explicit jokes with the male
officers. When the Sheriff investigated, she learned that the
female officer was Officer Rowdy. She called Rowdy into the
office and questioned her about the night at the bar. The Sheriff
told her that she was considering her for the detective division

but, with this complaint, she was having second thoughts.
Officer Rowdy told the Sheriff that she has to endure the verbal
abuse and give it back in kind in order to keep her job. If she
didn’t, she is sure that her fellow officers would do something
to get her fired. She told the Sheriff about her supervisor’s offer
of a promotion and the offensive Jewish jokes she’s had to put
up with since starting the job. She said she never said anything
because she was afraid. The only reason she is raising it now is
because her behavior in the bar is being questioned. She does
not want to lose her job but she does not want to alienate fellow
officers as they might retaliate and begin shunning her again.
She questioned whether all of this was happening because of her
religious practices. Although she does not talk it about it much
in the department, she is a practicing Jew and does not work on
any religious holidays. This has always been a subject of
amusement for fellow officers.
The Sheriff wants to know what she should do. Does she believe
her? After all, Rowdy’s been with the department for four years.
Why didn’t she come forward? Does that matter? What if the
supervisor did make her an offer? Can the Sheriff be held liable
for acts of her supervisors? If she disciplines Officer Rowdy for
her behavior in the bar to satisfy the citizen complaint, will she
have a legitimate claim against the Sheriff? If she is
disciplined, she will not be eligible for a promotion to the
detective division. Can she claim that a denial of a promotion is
religious discrimination? The Sheriff wants to know what she
should do (and why), based on your research and
recommendations.
Scenario #4:
Officer Renegade approached the Sheriff regarding the
placement of a GPS device on the automobile of a man
suspected of drug trafficking. The Sheriff told him to hold off
until he had some time to have legal counsel research what was
required. Officer Renegade was so convinced that the suspect

was about to pick up a substantial quantity of cocaine, he did
not wait to hear back from the sheriff. He planted a GPS device
on the suspect’s car and monitored his movements for ten days.
Based on those movements, Officer Renegade determined that
every two days the suspect drove to the same location, taking a
different route each time, but always returning to his residence.
Each trip took about the same amount of time. Officer Renegade
then obtained a search warrant of the suspect’s home based on
these monitored movements and surveillance of the suspect’s
home on his return from these trips. When the warrant was
executed, the police found two pounds of cocaine neatly
packaged in one-ounce plastic bags, scales, and a loose white
powder used to cut the cocaine before packaging. The suspect
was charged with trafficking in cocaine and related charges.
The suspect’s criminal lawyer has filed motions to suppress any
evidence taken from the suspect’s home claiming that the
warrantless placing of the GPS device was a violation of the
Fourth Amendment and therefore the search warrant of his
residence was invalid. The Sheriff wants to know what her
position should be, what the law is, and what your
recommendations are for dealing with this claim. She also wants
you to explain your reasons for your recommendations.
Additionally, the suspect’s civil lawyer has filed a Section 1983
claim against Officer Renegade, the Sheriff, and the city of
Saint Leo. The Sheriff wants to know what her position should
be, what the law is, and what your recommendations are for
dealing with this claim. She also wants you to state your
reasons for your recommendations.
Finally, the Sheriff was so angry, she fired Officer Renegade
for insubordination without a hearing. Officer Renegade was the
subject of many previous internal investigations and the Sheriff
did not want to risk a lawsuit for failure to discipline. Because
she knew that Officer Renegade would try to obtain employment

in the town of Peaceful Valley, the sheriff sent a copy of
Officer Renegade’s personnel file to Peaceful Valley’s sheriff.
Officer Renegade is threatening to sue the Sheriff and the city
for violating his property rights and his liberty rights. The
Sheriff wants to know if Officer Renegade has valid claims and
what her position should be.
Scenario #5:
The Saint Leo Police Department has a K-9 unit which is
primarily used in drug searches. Last week, the unit obtained a
search warrant for a convenience store in town. An informant
had given the department information that illegal drug
purchases were taking place in the store. The department has
never used this informant before and his credibility and
reliability have not been tested. The informant has pending
criminal charges against him and the supervisor of the unit told
the informant that if his information turned out to be reliable,
the supervisor would make a positive recommendation to the
prosecutor handling the informant’s case. The supervisor of the
unit prepared an affidavit in support of the search warrant
application using the informant’s statements. When it was
presented to the court, the judge was at lunch, so the clerk
signed the warrant. Armed with the warrant, the K-9 unit
proceeded to the convenience store. The owner of the store, Mr.
Wrong, allowed the officers and the K-9 dog named “Happy” to
enter the store without objection. Happy led the officers to a
storage room and then to a trap door that was concealed under a
rug. Many pounds of marijuana and several ounces of cocaine
were discovered under the building. After the officers secured
the evidence and were loading up their vehicles, Happy ran over
to the door of what appeared to be a private dwelling located
within 10 feet of the convenience store and gave a signal
indicating illegal drugs at that location. The supervisor knocked
on the door and was greeted by an individual, Mr. Right, who
turned and ran to the back of the residence. The supervisor
pursued him. Once in the house, the supervisor saw a scale and

what appeared to be a large amount of cocaine and several small
plastic baggies on the living room table. The supervisor arrested
Mr. Right and charged him with possession with intent to
distribute cocaine.
The owner of the convenience store, Mr. Wrong, has filed a
motion to suppress the evidence taken from the cellar based on
a defective search warrant. The Sheriff wants your advice
regarding that claim.
Mr. Right’s civil attorney has threatened a Section 1983 lawsuit
against the supervisor, the Sheriff, and the department because
his client’s constitutional rights were violated. The Sheriff
wants to know what claims Mr. Right might have against her,
the supervisor of the K- 9 unit, and the department. Do they all
have liability? The Sheriff would also like you to evaluate those
claims and make recommendations to her.
Mr. Right’s criminal attorney has filed a motion to suppress all
evidence taken from the residence based on an illegal search.
He says that a dog’s sniff of a private residence is a violation of
the Fourth Amendment. The Sheriff wants your advice on this
claim.
Scenario #6:
Officer Narcissus is the supervisor of the sexual assault unit at
the Saint Leo Police Department. The unit is made up of male
and female officers. Officer Narcissus has a Facebook account
which he accesses daily, sometimes from his department
computer. On Facebook, Officer Narcissus has posted several
photographs of himself, some of which are sexually suggestive.
In others, he is dressed in a vampire costume biting the neck of
woman. He has also posted photos of himself in his police
uniform. He posts his opinions on politics, his gripes about his
salary and hours, his sexual conquests, and his dislike of
everything the mayor of Saint Leo, who is up for re-election,

has ever done or not done while in office.
The Sheriff has received complaints from fellow officers and
from the public about Officer Narcissus’ posts. The
department’s code of conduct states that officers shall not
engage in any activity that reflects negatively on the
department.
The Sheriff went into Officer Narcissus’ office and turned on
his computer. She did this without the officer’s knowledge. She
saw that the computer had been used frequently to access
Facebook as well as other social media sites. It was also
obvious that the computer had been used to purchase sex toys
and hunting equipment. She went to his Facebook page and saw
all of the postings. When she was ready to shut down the
computer, she clicked on one site that she had not heard of
before. It turned out to be a child pornography site and there
were photographs of children being sexually abused. The
Sheriff wants to bring the officer in for questioning. When she
informed the officer of this, Officer Narcissus told the Sheriff
that she had no business using his computer to search for
anything. Officer Narcissus stormed into the department and
began dismantling his computer. The Sheriff and other officers
stopped him and cuffed him and placed him in a cell.
The Sheriff wants to know what she should do now. Can she
detain the officer? Can she question him? Does she have to give
him any rights? Did she have a right to search his computer?
For future reference, she wants to know what restrictions, if
any, she can place on her officers’ use of social media sites
such as Facebook.
Scenario #7:
Officer Speedy of the Saint Leo police department was
patrolling in her cruiser around midnight last night. A black
sports car came careening around the corner and almost hit the
cruiser. Officer Speedy pursued the sports car at a rate of speed

in excess of 100 mph through downtown Saint Leo. The bars
were closing and a number of people were in the area. Officer
Speedy lost control of the cruiser, jumped a curb, and hit and
killed a pedestrian on the sidewalk. The sports car driver looked
back to see what happened to the cruiser and drove into a
telephone pole, killing him. The family of the pedestrian is
threatening to sue the Sheriff and the city of Saint Leo. The
family of the sports car driver is threatening to sue the Sheriff
and the city of Saint Leo. The sheriff wants to know if either
party has any legitimate claims, and if so, what are they? The
department does not have a “hot pursuit” policy. Is that going to
hurt the Sheriff’s case against any lawsuits? The Sheriff wants
to know if she should discipline Officer Speedy and, if so, what
are the arguments for and against.
PAGE
2

CRJ 550Legal Issues in Criminal Justice AdministrationResear.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to CRJ 550Legal Issues in Criminal Justice AdministrationResear.docx

Similar to CRJ 550Legal Issues in Criminal Justice AdministrationResear.docx (10)

More from annettsparrow

More from annettsparrow (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

CRJ 550Legal Issues in Criminal Justice AdministrationResear.docx