Case Summaries for Criminal Procedure, 6e
John Scheb and John M. Scheb IIChapter 1
Duncan v. Louisiana (1968). Here the Supreme Court made the right of trial by jury applicable to defendants in state criminal cases. In a concurring opinion joined by Justice Douglas, Justice Black expressed his satisfaction with what the Court had done under the mantle of selective incorporation: “I believe as strongly as ever that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to make the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. I have been willing to support the selective incorporation doctrine, however, as an alternative, although perhaps less historically supportable than complete incorporation. ... [T]he selective incorporation process has the virtue of having already worked to make most of the Bill of Rights protections applicable to the States.”
Boykin v. Alabama (1969). Boykin pled guilty to five counts of common law robbery; however, at this time Alabama law provided for a jury to determine a defendant’s sentence. At the sentencing phase, the trial judge asked Boykin no questions regarding the voluntariness of his plea agreement nor did Boykin address the court. The prosecution presented eyewitness testimony; however, Boykin’s attorney failed to present any mitigating evidence on behalf of Mr. Boykin including the fact that there was no indication the defendant had a prior criminal history. The jury returned a death sentence. The Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Douglas, held “several federal constitutional rights are involved in a waiver that takes place when a plea of guilty is entered in a state criminal trial. First, is the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment…. Second, is the right to trial by jury. Third, is the right to confront one’s accusers. We cannot presume a waiver of these important federal rights from a silent record.” The Supreme Court reversed the defendant’s sentence because there was no indication in the court record that his plea was made “voluntary and understandingly.”
Chapter 2
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). Clarence Earl Gideon, a 51 year-old indigent “drifter” who had been in and out of jails all his adult life, was charged with felonious breaking and entering. At trial, he requested that the court appoint an attorney to represent him. The court refused, citing the Florida law that required appointment of counsel for indigent defendants only in capital cases. While serving his sentence in the Florida State Prison, Gideon unsuccessfully challenged his conviction in the Florida Supreme Court on a writ of habeas corpus. He then obtained review by the U.S. Supreme Court on a writ of certiorari. In a unanimous decision, the Court reversed Gideon’s conviction. Writing for the Court, Hugo Black opined that “[t]he right of one charged with a crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours.” Gideon v. Wainwright over ...
An Overview of Procedural Rights in White Collar Criminal ProsecutionsJeffrey Ahonen
This presentation is targeted primarily to paralegals, legal assistants, and legal secretaries, and provides an overview of a defendant's federal constitutional rights in a white collar criminal prosecution. It was created for a webinar conducted on February 10, 2011, under the sponsorship of the American Alliance of Paralegals, Inc., a nonprofit organization for professional paralegals.
Protecting Defendants
UAB PSC 381 Bill of Rights
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Bowers v. Hardick
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
An Overview of Procedural Rights in White Collar Criminal ProsecutionsJeffrey Ahonen
This presentation is targeted primarily to paralegals, legal assistants, and legal secretaries, and provides an overview of a defendant's federal constitutional rights in a white collar criminal prosecution. It was created for a webinar conducted on February 10, 2011, under the sponsorship of the American Alliance of Paralegals, Inc., a nonprofit organization for professional paralegals.
Protecting Defendants
UAB PSC 381 Bill of Rights
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
Bowers v. Hardick
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)
EDUC 742EDUC 742Reading Summary and Reflective Comments .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 742
EDUC 742
Reading Summary and Reflective Comments Form & Instructions
For each assigned reading, summarize the main principles and reflect on these principles in order to make the content meaningful to you. This will ensure that you understand the reading and understand its relationship to daily life experiences within your educational setting or work environment. The reflective statements may draw on previous experiences or future plans to use the information from the reading. You are also encouraged to critique ideas in light of a biblical worldview. Summaries will be 100-125 words and will be in paragraph form, and the reflections will be 150-200 words. (Submit the Reading Summary by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday in Modules/Weeks 1, 3, 4, 5, and on Friday in Module/Week 8, adding the new entries each time.)
STUDENT NAME:
Bridget Pruitt
Reading
Assignment
Main Principles
Reflective Comments
Reading Summary 1
Razik and Swanson
Data within the United States is processed based on four assessments. The assessments are reading, math, science, and other subjects. They are based on 4th, 8th, and 12th graders. They are also broken up into different ethnic groups. There are a lot of data that is alarming within the U.S. Data is based on household characteristics, family and peer influences, and student achievement. Also in this chapter it reaches on the education reform movement. Global forces and the specific causes that are concerning within the U.S. education system. What are the causes of failure within the U.S. school system and what changes can be implemented to improve the rapid downfall of our education system.
When all of the assessments were implemented on the different groups that provided data that broke up the groups that is when I feel our education system had been broken. Ways of instruction as well as curriculum has not changed much, however, all of the testing data is what has changed and the ways that the data is being implemented. Schools have become all about the numbers instead of the importance of what is being taught to our children. If the U.S. school systems were not all about the numbers and teaching our children how to read and write I feel that our schools would be more successful in all the data assessments that are being implemented. The problem is that special attention is given to achievement gaps among ethnic and economic groups instead of teaching everyone the same way that was taught years and years ago. With all the changes within the school systems and how they are wanting teachers to teach their children has caused a lot of confusion as well as stress upon the teachers as well as the children.
Van
Brummelen
First of all, I love this book. It goes into practices and prospective within the interaction between theory and practice. It explains why in public schools that God cannot be taught and how the Christian schools central theme is focused in the teachings of Jesus Christ. In this chapter it.
EDUC 380 Blog Post Samples Module 1 The Brain Below .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 380 Blog Post Samples
Module 1: The Brain
Below are some student examples that are excellent blog posts for the first two prompts in Module 1
(The Brain). The goal for the discussion posts is to engage in the module materials directly and explore
some of the questions and issues in each module more deeply. The posts are very important for your
learning. Below you will find comments to help you understand how these students met the rubric
requirements. The rubric for blog posts is posted in the end of this document and is in the course
syllabus.
Blog Post # 1:
● Describe a time when you engaged in something adults might consider risky and/or thoughtless:
● How old were you?
● Why did you do it?
● What were you thinking at the time?
Think back to the article on risk-taking you read and to the video you watched on the teen brain. What
connections can you make between the lecture, the article, and/or the video?
Growing up, my family would take annual trips to the river in Laughlin, Nevada. We
would go with our family friends who had kids with a wide range of ages. I was 13 years
old at the time within the middle age range. A big activity at the river is jumping off of
rocks. My parents did not want my sisters and me to engage in this activity. During one
of the annual trips, I joined the older teenagers on a boat ride to the “jumping rock.”
Depending on how much risk they wanted to take, there are different levels for people
to jump off of. All of the older teens were jumping off of the highest level. I decided to
join the older teens and jump from the tallest rock. At the time, I wanted to do it
because all of the older teenagers were doing it. I wanted to be like them. This was not
an impulsive decision. I had thought about doing this activity the whole trip and decided
to go on the boat ride, knowing they were going to jump off the tallest rock. The article,
“Beautiful Brains,” explains, “Seeking sensation isn’t necessarily impulsive. You might
plan a sensation-seeking experience- a skydive or a fast car…” (Dobbs, 2011, p. 49).
By jumping off the rock with them, I thought this would change their view of me as an
older and more mature teenager. When they changed their opinion about me, it would
allow me to hang out with them all the time. I was taking more risks because I would get
a higher reward. This relates to the article, “Beautiful Brains,” which states, “Teens take
more risks not because they don’t understand the dangers but because they weigh risk
versus reward differently. In situations where risk can get them something they want,
they value the reward more heavily than adults do” (Dobbs, 2011, p. 54). By jumping off
the tallest rock, it gave me the reward of spending more time with the older teenagers.
If I had jumped off the shorter rock, I could have not been accepted into the group
because they did not view me as mature as themselves. Therefore, I would have been
penalized for not.
EDUC 741Course Project Part 1 Grading RubricCriteriaLevels .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 741
Course Project: Part 1 Grading Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content 70%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not Present
Analysis
13 to 14 points
The analysis thoroughly interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings.
12 points
The analysis partially interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings.
1 to 11 points
The analysis attempts of some aspects of analysis and interpretation of journal articles in a limited way. The review is more descriptive than analytical.
0 points
Not present
Use of Evidence and Relevant Outside Information
13 points
The analysis is thoroughly supported with relevant facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is often incorporated into the analysis.
11 to 12 points
The analysis is generally supported with relevant facts, arguments, and details. Information outside the subject articles is occasionally incorporated into the analysis.
1 to 10 points
The analysis is thoroughly supported with some facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is incorporated in a limited way into the analysis.
0 points
Not present
Organization and Development
13 points
The analysis is quite well-reasoned, indicating substantial breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is thorough and meaningful.
11 to 12 points
The analysis is generally well-reasoned, indicating some breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is generally sound.
1 to 10 points
The analysis has limited reasoning, indicating a surface understanding of the articles. The summary of each article is limited.
0 points
Not present
Body – Biblical Worldview
13 points
A biblical worldview perspective is clearly articulated and is supported by appropriate Scripture references, course requirements, and application.
11 to 12 points
A biblical worldview perspective is articulated but is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and somewhat applies to course requirements and application.
1 to 10 points
A biblical worldview perspective is poorly articulated and is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and does not apply to course requirements and application.
0 points
Not present
Structure 30%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not Present
Grammar and Spelling
6 points
Correct spelling and grammar are used throughout the essay. There are 0–2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
5 points
There are 3–5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
1 to 4 points
There are 6–10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
0 points
There are more than 10 errors in the grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
Sentence Structure and Mechanics
6 points
Sentences are well-phrased and varied in lengt.
EDUC 740
Prayer Reflection Report Grading Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content 70%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not present
Structure & Organization
33 to 35 points
The paper has a clearly constructed introduction that builds the foundation for further reflection. The structure is clear, logical, and easy to follow. Each paragraph is focused and uses excellent transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a clear conclusion. Overall writing style is appropriate for a graduate-level course.
30 to 32 points
The paper has a constructed introduction that builds the foundation for further reflection. The structure is clear, logical, and easy to follow. Each paragraph is focused and uses transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a conclusion. Overall writing style is appropriate for a graduate-level course.
1 to 29 points
The paper has a constructed introduction that is beginning to build the foundation for further reflection. The structure is vague and difficult to follow. Not all paragraphs are focused and don’t always use transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a conclusion. Overall writing style is not appropriate for a graduate-level course.
0 points
Not present
Analysis
19 to 20 points
The content reflects higher-level thinking through critical self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes specific examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes specific examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
17 to 18 points
The content reflects thinking through self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
1 to 16 points
The content does not reflect higher-level thinking through critical self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a vague discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes minimal examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes ambiguous examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
0 points
Not present
Support
14 to 15 points
Biblical references and principles are integrated into the paper appropriately, demonstrating an excellent understanding of biblical leadership principles.
13 points
Biblical references and principles are integrated.
EDUC 6733 Action Research for EducatorsReading LiteracyDraft.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 6733 Action Research for Educators
Reading Literacy
Draft
Part A
The context of the classroom setting
In the first section of this action research project I will address the context of classroom setting. Although, it is as important as the teaching itself and understand it is essential in creating learning environments in which every student can thrive. According to Pallardy, context is a classroom’s characteristics such as the composition of the student body, classroom structures and resources. Furthermore, by establishing that context is dependent on student learning we are able to come up with an action research question that will be discussed in this essay. The action research will be on the reading workshop; Is motivation among students a big challenge when it comes to reading literacy?
In addition, a reading workshop is one way to structure a class. Developing strong reading skills in students is one of the key goals in an educational program. Reading workshops encourages the students to become better readers. To accommodate the children’s variability, I assess the children through instructing them to write journals on what they have read and giving them vocabulary tests on that week’s reading. This helps when it comes to identifying student with a reading problem and can be able to tailor lessons to individuals.
One of the concerns that I have experienced in this classroom setting of reading workshops is children’s motivation to read books that they have selected. Their ability to choose the right book and their commitment to stay with the book until they finished is also a concern when it comes to their motivation when reading books. These findings were drawn from the data of the journals and vocabulary test that I had assigned to them. The journals that they wrote the boys in the class performed poorly more than the girls. There is also the fact that the boys in the class didn’t find satisfaction in reading unlike the girls. The boys also were not reading books of their own accord unlike the girls in the class who spent hours with ‘series’ books and other chapter books.
The classroom has 24 students; 52% are boys and 48% are girls. The last two tests on vocabulary showed that girls performed more than the boys. Also, the literature review was discouraging: the boys were lagging the girls. This concerns may be a product of the independent reading workshop and of the freedom of children to choose their own books during that session.
Through observation and interaction with the boys that excelled in the literature reviews I noted that families had a strong impact and the boys that saw their fathers at home read were more likely to choose to read. Therefore, having spoken with the school administration I invited some of the male role models for the boys. I invited teachers, some of their fathers, other school male employees to visit the class and talk about their reading habits. Some of them were frank about their discovery about.
EDUC 637
Technology Portfolio InstructionsGeneral Overview
For this assignment, you will identify forms of and applications for technology for use in a middle school social studies classroom. You will be required to describe the general applications of these technologies, specific applied activities in the general social studies arena, and provide an evaluation.Learning Objective
You will develop a portfolio of technologies that could be used in a middle school social studies classroom, identifying general uses, aligned appropriate national social studies standards, potential activities, and good and bad points to that technology’s use.Assignment Process
1. Select 10 technologies (defined below) that can be used in an educational setting/environment for each of the categories listed below. Notice that I did not say educational or instructional technologies. This is to not restrict you to that search parameter, but rather to allow you to explore critically any technology that might have a pedagogical use. Select technologies representing:
a. Hardware devices
b. Business/productivity software (i.e., Microsoft Office)
c. Web-based technologies (delivered via the Internet)
d. Multimedia software (audio, video, graphical)
e. Games/entertainment
2. Then review each technology answering the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs for each question (best recorded in a word-processing program like Microsoft Word as a multi-page document). Questions to answer include:
a. What are the general functions and purposes of this technology?
b. What types of social studies objectives/goals could be met by this technology and how? Please relate to an NCSS main theme (or more than 1 if appropriate).
c. What, in your opinion, are the good and bad points of using this technology in a pedagogical setting? Consider this a risk analysis.
3. Turn in the completed assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of Module/Week 2.
EDUC 637
Literature Review InstructionsGeneral Overview
Please read the instructions and rubric for the Literature Review assignment BEFORE you sign-up for a topic. You will want to select a topic wisely so you will be able to identify 5 trends in your research.
For this assignment, you will select a topic in the general area of social studies instruction in middle grade education and examine accompanying literature related to that topic to identify the latest trends and issues. Ultimately, you will compile these results into a PowerPoint presentation of around 10 slides to identify these trends.Learning Objective
You will develop a presentation identifying general trends in middle-grade social studies education associated with a set of articles in the content area.Assignment Process
1. Begin classifying and compiling articles and sub-topics into groups of information for presentation (note 5 trends).
2. You should have scanned at least 30 articles in the process, which then need to be provided as part of this assignment in an attached bi.
EDUC 364 The Role of Cultural Diversity in Schooling A dialecti.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 364: The Role of Cultural Diversity in Schooling
A dialectical journal is one in which you engage in conversation with the text. This involves pulling quotes from the text, and providing your reaction, thoughts, analysis and/or questions about what you’ve read. When reading a chapter from Spring(chapter2 and 3), choose 3-5 short passages/selections from each assigned chapter on which to reflect. See the example below. You can format your DJ in a chart format (see next page for template), or you can format it simply as a question/answer format like below. The goal is to use the DJ to think through your reactions and prepare for discussion. Submit your DJ to Cougar Courses prior to class, and if you don’t have your computer with you in class, print it out so you have it with you for a class discussion
Example
Quote: “Faced with the world’s migration of people’s, some countries, such as Singapore, have maintained cultural pluralism by providing public schools that use the child’s home language and reflect the cultural values of the child’s home. Through the use of educational methods that promote cultural pluralism, Singapore has been able to maintain Chinese, Malay, and Indian cultures and languages. Therefore, there have been different educational approaches to the intersection of cultures resulting from globalization...Minority cultures in the United State have primarily experienced cultural genocide, deculturalization, and denial of education. Immigrant groups have mostly experienced assimilation and hybridity.” (Chapter 1).
Response: This is always what I come back to when thinking about American education. We could have chosen a different path, a different approach educating the various groups of children that have come through the school system. But instead of seeing schooling primarily as a democratizing tool, the founders and those in government who came after them saw schooling as a tool for deculturalization, for imposing hegemony. What is most frustrating is how to tease out how our current system still contains the legacy of those oppressive institutional choices. Seeing those remnants for what they are--clearly--is the only way to change the system to truly benefit all kids.
.
EDUC 144 Writing Tips The writing assignments in this cla.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 144 Writing Tips
The writing assignments in this class require students to engage in critical thinking and analysis,
producing papers that go beyond simple summaries of course readings by utilizing concepts, ideas, and
findings in course readings to critically analyze contemporary schooling and academic achievement in
the United States. Below is a list of suggestions to help you write strong papers that are critical and
analytical.
The introductory paragraph should briefly mention the topic and purpose/focus of your paper and state
your thesis in clear, specific terms (i.e. “In this paper, I will argue…” or “I will contend...,” or “I will
demonstrate…”).
Each paragraph in the body of the paper should be tightly organized around one main idea. Each
paragraph should build on previous ones and provide concrete examples/findings from the week’s
readings that serve as data that support your analysis, or examples from your own experiences and
observations of schooling that serve as evidence in support of your analysis. If you are drawing on a
specific theoretical concept(s) or idea(s) in your analysis, remember to clearly define and explain the
concept(s) or idea(s) before using that concept(s) or idea(s) to investigate and analyze particular aspects
of contemporary schooling.
The concluding paragraph needs to restate the thesis and main points addressed in the paper.
Sometimes writers do not know what their argument is until they have reached the end of the paper—or
the thesis has changed by the end. If either of these happens to you, be sure to put your thesis in the first
paragraph as well and/or make sure that you are making the same argument throughout the paper.
Things to keep in mind, at the level of the paragraph:
Make sure your comments are relevant to the topic at hand: one way to do this is to make an outline of
each paragraph’s main idea; each one should clearly relate to the topic and focus/purpose or thesis of
your paper. It is writer’s responsibility to select relevant concepts or ideas, examples of research
findings from the week’s readings, and/or personal experiences and observations that relate directly to
the topic and purpose/focus of the paper. It is not appropriate to expect the reader to do this instead.
Remember, examples/research findings and personal experiences and observations are not “obviously”
evidence in support of your analysis until you explicitly explain how these examples/findings/
experiences/observations support the claims in your analysis.
Make sure each paragraph’s main idea is clearly connected to your thesis.
*Smoothly transition between paragraphs: connect first line of new paragraph with main idea of
previous paragraph.
*Stick to the facts at hand—do not overstate your case.
Things to keep in mind, at the level of the sentence:
*Tighten sentence structure: combine sentences when possible by eliminating redundant information.
*Employ p.
EDUC 1300- LEARNING FRAMEWORK
Portfolio Page Prompts
INTRODUCTION
This page introduces, not you, but your portfolio. . Invite people into the portfolio and give them a reason for
exploring further Convey your purpose in creating the portfolio. Include a picture of yourself, and a quote
that is meaningful to you. No attachment is needed on this page. (10 points)
ABOUT ME
This page introduces you. Share information about yourself – your family, hobbies, work, and what you enjoy.
Don’t just TELL people, SHOW who you are, too. Things you might include: photos, images, or video/links
that interest you. Attach your Quality World Essay or another paper about yourself to this page. (10 points)
GOALS
List your long-term goals: personal, education, career. Identify the short-term and intermediate goals that will
help you progress toward these long-term goals. Include images that help you and your viewer visualize your
goals. Attach your degree plan/Timeline assignment to show your academic plans/goals. (10 points)
LEARNING
This page showcases what you’ve learned about your learning. Collect information you’ve gathered about
yourself and how you learn, such as learning styles inventories, personality type indicators, and your
Strengthsquest assessment. Interpret those results and draw conclusions about yourself from this evidence and
write about it. Attach your Insight Report from Strengthsquest so your viewer can learn more about your top
5 strengths or another assessment report which have helped you identify how you learn. (15 points)
THINKING
What have you learned this semester about critical thinking? What have you created that demonstrates the
quality of your thinking? Select examples and identify these qualities in your reflection. Attach an
assignment/paper from this class or another that show your thinking abilities. (15 points)
RESEARCH
On this page, post a question that you’ve selected to research and write what you found. What did you learn
about using the online databases? How will that help you in future classes? Attach your annotated
bibliography/research organizers and/or a research paper from another course. (15 points)
REFLECTION:
Your Introduction page described the purpose of the portfolio. On this page, provide a conclusion. Reflect on
your experience in the course and semester in creating this portfolio. Consider the following prompts:
What expectations or assumptions did you have before the course began? Were they valid or invalid?
How has the course contributed to your understanding of yourself and others?
What impact did the course have on your understanding of your quality world?
How do you now assume responsibility for your learning? What thinking and behaviors will you further
develop on your journey to becoming an autonomous learner?
(15 points)
EDUC 1300 Learning Framework Grading Rubric
Page Unsatisfactory
.
EDU734 Teaching and Learning Environment Week 5.docxtidwellveronique
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
Week 5: Curriculum
Development
Topic goals
To gain an understanding of the concept of
curriculum development and its importance
To gain an understanding of how curriculum
is implemented in different cultural contexts
Task – Forum
Do you think that the current school curriculum needs
to be adapted more to the modern culture? If so, in
what ways do you think it can be done?
What do you consider to be the implications for the
nature of valid knowledge in the future school curriculum?
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 1
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.1 Introduction
Curriculum lies at the heart of educational policies and practices.
They are are highly political documents which convey ideological positions about
the type of education that should be given in different cultural contexts and the
citizenship values that can be shared by the citizen of a state (Apple, 2004).
Each society has its own values and beliefs which they want to be translated into
educational objectives via the curriculum.
“Curriculum is a comprehensive plan for an educational programme/institute/
course to offer new or improved manpower to accomplish the rising needs of a
dynamic society” (Pillai, 2015).
5.1.1 Orientations to curriculum
Child-centred
Society-centred
Knowledge-centred
Eclectic
5.1.2 Determinants of the curriculum
Basic needs
Social aspects
Cultural factors
Individual talents
Ideals: intellectual, moral, aesthetic, religious
Tradition
(Pillai, 2015)
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 2
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.2 Definition of Curriculum Development
Curriculum development is defined as the process which is planned, purposeful,
progressive, and systematic in order to create positive improvements in the
educational system.
The curriculum is affected by any changes or developments that affect society
(Alvior, 2014).
It needs to correspond to those changes but at the same time to respect all
people despite of gender, ethnicity, disability, religion etc. (Symeonidou and
Mavrou, 2014).
2. How can
1. What learning 3. How can
4. How can the
educational experiences learning
effectiveness of
purposes that are likely to experiences be
learning
should the be useful in organised for
experiences be
school seek to attaining these effective
evaluated?
attain? objectives be instruction?
selected?
Diagram 5.1: Four questions for the organization and development of the
curriculum (Tyler, 1949, cited in Howard, 2007)
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 3
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.2.1 Four principles for the development of any curriculum:
Def.
EDU 505 – Contemporary Issues in EducationCOURSE DESCRIPTION.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 505 – Contemporary Issues in Education
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Examines theory, research, and practices relating to critical issues faced by educators today. Discusses contemporary concerns in American and global education: National and local initiatives in education, the evolving relationship between schools and communities, impacts of public policy on the educational enterprise, and current social, political, economic, and legal issues influencing schools are explored from American and global perspectives. Evaluates the future of education in both industrial and developing countries, including growth of learning needs and inequities both within and between countries. Emphasizes problem identification, analysis, and remediation, with the latter focusing on “best of breed” innovative practices.
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
Required Resources – Textbook
Tozer, S. E., Senese, G., & Violas, P. C. (2013). School and society: Historical and contemporary perspectives (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Required Resources – Articles
Baker, B., Sciarra, D., & Farrie, D. (2014). Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card. Retrieved from http://www.schoolfundingfairness.org/National_Report_Card_2014.pdf
Baker, B., & Corcoran, S. (2012). The Stealth Inequities of School Funding: How State and Local School Finance Systems Perpetuate Inequitable Student Spending. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2012/09/19/38189/the-stealth-inequities-of-school-funding/
Brackemyre, T. (2012). Education to the Masses: The Rise of Public Education in Early America. History Scene. Retrieved from http://www.ushistoryscene.com/uncategorized/riseofpubliceducation/
Cobb, N. (2014). Climate, Culture and Collaboration: The Key to Creating Safe and Supportive Schools. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers. Retrieved from: http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1bde4a76-6090-47af-8294-13f37c6936c7%40sessionmgr110&vid=16&hid=112
Gardner, H. (2011). To improve U.S. education, it’s time to treat teachers as professionals. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/to-improve-us-education-its-time-to-treat-teachers-as-professionals/2011/07/18/gIQA8oh2LI_story.html
Garrity, C., & Jens, K. (1997). Bully Proofing Your School: Creating a Positive Climate. Intervention in School & Clinic. Retrieved from http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=1bde4a76-6090-47af-8294-13f37c6936c7%40sessionmgr110&hid=112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=9703123351
Hiler, T., & Hatalsky, L.(2014). TEACH Grant Trap: Program to Encourage Young People to Teach Falls Short. Third Way. Retrieved from http://www.thirdway.org/memo/teach-grant-trap-program-to-encourage-young-people-to-teach-falls-short
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2015). Cyberbullying Legislation and Case Law: Implications for School Policy and Practice. Retrieved from.
EDU 3338 Lesson Plan TemplateCandidate NameCooperatin.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 3338 Lesson Plan Template
Candidate Name:
Cooperating Teacher Name:
Placement Site:
Grade Level:
Subject:
Length of Lesson:
Lesson Title:
Date of Lesson:
Learning Central Focus
Central Focus
What is the central focus for the content in the learning segment?
Content Standard
What standard(s) are most relevant to the learning goals?
Student Learning Goal(s)/ Objective(s)
Skills/procedures
What are the specific learning goal(s) for student in this lesson?
Concepts and reasoning/problem solving/thinking/strategies[footnoteRef:1] [1: The prompt provided here should be modified to reflect subject specific aspects of learning. Language here is mathematics related. See candidate edTPA handbooks for the “Making Good Choices” resource for subject specific components. ]
What are the specific learning goal(s) for students in this lesson?
Prior Academic Knowledge and Conceptions
What knowledge, skills, and concepts must students already know to be successful with this lesson?
What prior knowledge and/or gaps in knowledge do these students have that are necessary to support the learning of the skills and concepts for this lesson?
Theoretical Principles and/or Research–Based Best Practices
Why are the learning tasks for this lesson appropriate for your students?
Materials
What materials does the teacher need for this lesson?
What materials do the students need for this lesson?
Assessments, Instructional Strategies, and Learning Tasks
Description of what the teacher (you) will be doing and/or what the students will be doing.
Launch
__________ Minutes
How will you start the lesson to engage and motivate students in learning?
Pre-Assessment
How will you find out what students already know about the lesson objective?
What tangible pre-assessments will you administer?
How will you evaluate student performance on the pre-assessment?
Instruction
__________ Minutes
What will you do to engage students in developing understanding of the lesson objective(s)?
How will you link the new content (skills and concepts) to students’ prior academic learning and their personal/cultural and community assets?
What will you say and do? What questions will you ask?
How will you engage students to help them understand the concepts?
What will students do?
How will you determine if students are meeting the intended learning objectives?
Structured Practice and
Application
__________ Minutes
How will you give students the opportunity to practice so you can provide feedback?
How will students apply what they have learned?
How will you structure opportunities for students to work with partners or in groups? What criteria will you use when forming groups?
Formative Assessment
What formative assessment techniques will you utilize to determine if students are meeting the intended learning objectives?
Differentiation/ Planned Support
How will you provide students access to learning based on individual and group need.
EDU 3215 Lesson Plan Template & Elements Name Andres Rod.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 3215 Lesson Plan Template & Elements
Name: Andres Rodriguez
Email address: [email protected]
Content Areas: English Language Arts and Social Studies
Common Core Standard(s): (list and write all applicable)
ELA CCSS:
RI 7.1 - Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly
as well as inferences drawn from the text.
RI 7.3 - Analyze the interactions between individuals, events, and ideas in a text (e.g., how ideas
influence individuals or events, or how individuals influence ideas or events).
RI 7. 4 - Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including
figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze the impact of a specific word choice on
meaning and tone.
CCSS: RH.6–8.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary
sources.
RH.6–8.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide
an accurate summary of the source distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.
Essential Question(s): How did colonists, African Americans, and Native Americans choose
sides during the Revolutionary War?
Introduction and Lesson Objective (outline the purpose for the lesson in 50 -100 words)
E.g., This lesson is focused on the role of the Native Americans during the American
Revolution. Students explored the roles of the Patriots and the Red Coats and will synthesize this
information with the roles of Native Americans during the American Revolution. The purpose is
for students to understand the variety of people and reasons who were involved in the American
Revolution.
Resources/Materials/Technology Utilized:
E.g., Computer, Smartboard, NewsELA article, Reading about Mohawk Mary Molly Bryant,
Notebooks, Pens, Pencils, Index cards, looseleaf
Instructional Sequence (x amount of minutes/ how many days will this lesson cover).
Include evidence of Explicit Instruction within the tasks/activity:
ortliebe
Highlight
ortliebe
Highlight
Time Allocation Objective Activity
Assessment/Evaluatio
n
7-9 minutes
This will help
the teacher
gauge what
knowledge the
students are
coming into the
lesson with.
Do Now - Answer the
following question:
Who do you think the
Native Americans fought
with/along side during the
American Revolution?
Why do you believe they
chose this side.
Teacher will walk
around and take note
of how many students
choose Patriots or Red
Coats. This will help
with grouping in
future lessons.
10 minutes
Reading a
document about
Mohawk Mary
Molly Bryant as
a class to help
students with
annotating
relevant facts
and details that
will help them
answer critical
thinking
questions later
on.
Reading a document about
a Native American woman,
Mohawk Mary Molly
Bryant as a class. Teacher
asks the following
questions during the
reading and students
underline/annotate the
answers based on t.
EDST 1100R SITUATED LEARNING EDST 1100 N Situated Learning .docxtidwellveronique
EDST 1100R: SITUATED LEARNING
EDST 1100 N: Situated Learning
Thursdays, 2.30 – 5.30
Keele Campus, Mac 050B
Winter, 2020
Instructor: Dr. Lorin Schwarz
Email: [email protected]
Office Hours: ½ hour after class, or by appointment
*
Learning is intentional and contextual, and it involves developing systems and structures that not only allow but also encourage organization members to learn and grow together –to develop “communities of practice.”
-Preskill and Torres
The idea of a subject that calls to us is more than metaphor. In the community of truth, the knower is not the only active agent –the subject itself participates in the dialectic of knowing...geologists are people who hear rocks speak, historians are people who hear the voices of the long dead, writers are people who hear the music of words. The things of the world call to us, and we are drawn to them –each of us to different things, as each is drawn to different friends.
--Parker J. Palmer
Teaching is a complex, relational, and creative event. When I teach, I am simultaneously involved in several dynamic relations: with myself, with my everyday world, with my subject matter, and with my students. I cannot really teach if I am not engaged with my students or if my students are not involved with me.
--Carol S. Becker
The relationship between our physical constraints and the assertion of our freedom is not a 'problem' requiring a solution. It is simply the way human beings are. Our condition is to be ambiguous to the core, and our task is to learn to manage the movement and uncertainty in our existence, not banish it...the ambiguous human condition means tirelessly trying to take control of things. We have to do two near-impossible things at once: understand ourselves as limited by circumstances, and yet continue to pursue our projects as though we are truly in control.
--Sarah Bakewell
Course Description
Welcome to EDST 1100: “Situated Learning.” As described in the university calendar, the aims of this seminar are as follows:
“This course is framed around situated learning theories in relation to the provisioning of educational experiences in a variety of contexts (e.g., early familial experiences, formal educational experiences, cultural educational experiences, employment educational experiences). Students are first introduced to the major principles of families of learning theories (e.g., behaviourism, cognitivism, social learning theory, social constructivism). This introduction is followed by in-depth study of situated learning theory drawing from Lave and Wenger (1991) a seminal text in the field. Students engage in exploring exemplars of situated learning drawing from theory to understand the factors at play in the exemplars because, as situated learning theory would suggest, the representations of situated learning theory must be situated in relation to reference points. Given any particular learning engagement’s situational parameters, stu.
More Related Content
Similar to Case Summaries for Criminal Procedure, 6eJohn Scheb and John M. .docx
EDUC 742EDUC 742Reading Summary and Reflective Comments .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 742
EDUC 742
Reading Summary and Reflective Comments Form & Instructions
For each assigned reading, summarize the main principles and reflect on these principles in order to make the content meaningful to you. This will ensure that you understand the reading and understand its relationship to daily life experiences within your educational setting or work environment. The reflective statements may draw on previous experiences or future plans to use the information from the reading. You are also encouraged to critique ideas in light of a biblical worldview. Summaries will be 100-125 words and will be in paragraph form, and the reflections will be 150-200 words. (Submit the Reading Summary by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday in Modules/Weeks 1, 3, 4, 5, and on Friday in Module/Week 8, adding the new entries each time.)
STUDENT NAME:
Bridget Pruitt
Reading
Assignment
Main Principles
Reflective Comments
Reading Summary 1
Razik and Swanson
Data within the United States is processed based on four assessments. The assessments are reading, math, science, and other subjects. They are based on 4th, 8th, and 12th graders. They are also broken up into different ethnic groups. There are a lot of data that is alarming within the U.S. Data is based on household characteristics, family and peer influences, and student achievement. Also in this chapter it reaches on the education reform movement. Global forces and the specific causes that are concerning within the U.S. education system. What are the causes of failure within the U.S. school system and what changes can be implemented to improve the rapid downfall of our education system.
When all of the assessments were implemented on the different groups that provided data that broke up the groups that is when I feel our education system had been broken. Ways of instruction as well as curriculum has not changed much, however, all of the testing data is what has changed and the ways that the data is being implemented. Schools have become all about the numbers instead of the importance of what is being taught to our children. If the U.S. school systems were not all about the numbers and teaching our children how to read and write I feel that our schools would be more successful in all the data assessments that are being implemented. The problem is that special attention is given to achievement gaps among ethnic and economic groups instead of teaching everyone the same way that was taught years and years ago. With all the changes within the school systems and how they are wanting teachers to teach their children has caused a lot of confusion as well as stress upon the teachers as well as the children.
Van
Brummelen
First of all, I love this book. It goes into practices and prospective within the interaction between theory and practice. It explains why in public schools that God cannot be taught and how the Christian schools central theme is focused in the teachings of Jesus Christ. In this chapter it.
EDUC 380 Blog Post Samples Module 1 The Brain Below .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 380 Blog Post Samples
Module 1: The Brain
Below are some student examples that are excellent blog posts for the first two prompts in Module 1
(The Brain). The goal for the discussion posts is to engage in the module materials directly and explore
some of the questions and issues in each module more deeply. The posts are very important for your
learning. Below you will find comments to help you understand how these students met the rubric
requirements. The rubric for blog posts is posted in the end of this document and is in the course
syllabus.
Blog Post # 1:
● Describe a time when you engaged in something adults might consider risky and/or thoughtless:
● How old were you?
● Why did you do it?
● What were you thinking at the time?
Think back to the article on risk-taking you read and to the video you watched on the teen brain. What
connections can you make between the lecture, the article, and/or the video?
Growing up, my family would take annual trips to the river in Laughlin, Nevada. We
would go with our family friends who had kids with a wide range of ages. I was 13 years
old at the time within the middle age range. A big activity at the river is jumping off of
rocks. My parents did not want my sisters and me to engage in this activity. During one
of the annual trips, I joined the older teenagers on a boat ride to the “jumping rock.”
Depending on how much risk they wanted to take, there are different levels for people
to jump off of. All of the older teens were jumping off of the highest level. I decided to
join the older teens and jump from the tallest rock. At the time, I wanted to do it
because all of the older teenagers were doing it. I wanted to be like them. This was not
an impulsive decision. I had thought about doing this activity the whole trip and decided
to go on the boat ride, knowing they were going to jump off the tallest rock. The article,
“Beautiful Brains,” explains, “Seeking sensation isn’t necessarily impulsive. You might
plan a sensation-seeking experience- a skydive or a fast car…” (Dobbs, 2011, p. 49).
By jumping off the rock with them, I thought this would change their view of me as an
older and more mature teenager. When they changed their opinion about me, it would
allow me to hang out with them all the time. I was taking more risks because I would get
a higher reward. This relates to the article, “Beautiful Brains,” which states, “Teens take
more risks not because they don’t understand the dangers but because they weigh risk
versus reward differently. In situations where risk can get them something they want,
they value the reward more heavily than adults do” (Dobbs, 2011, p. 54). By jumping off
the tallest rock, it gave me the reward of spending more time with the older teenagers.
If I had jumped off the shorter rock, I could have not been accepted into the group
because they did not view me as mature as themselves. Therefore, I would have been
penalized for not.
EDUC 741Course Project Part 1 Grading RubricCriteriaLevels .docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 741
Course Project: Part 1 Grading Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content 70%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not Present
Analysis
13 to 14 points
The analysis thoroughly interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings.
12 points
The analysis partially interprets and examines at least three referred journal articles for perspective, validity, and significance of the findings.
1 to 11 points
The analysis attempts of some aspects of analysis and interpretation of journal articles in a limited way. The review is more descriptive than analytical.
0 points
Not present
Use of Evidence and Relevant Outside Information
13 points
The analysis is thoroughly supported with relevant facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is often incorporated into the analysis.
11 to 12 points
The analysis is generally supported with relevant facts, arguments, and details. Information outside the subject articles is occasionally incorporated into the analysis.
1 to 10 points
The analysis is thoroughly supported with some facts, arguments, examples, and details. Information outside the subject articles is incorporated in a limited way into the analysis.
0 points
Not present
Organization and Development
13 points
The analysis is quite well-reasoned, indicating substantial breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is thorough and meaningful.
11 to 12 points
The analysis is generally well-reasoned, indicating some breath and depth of thinking. The summary of each article is generally sound.
1 to 10 points
The analysis has limited reasoning, indicating a surface understanding of the articles. The summary of each article is limited.
0 points
Not present
Body – Biblical Worldview
13 points
A biblical worldview perspective is clearly articulated and is supported by appropriate Scripture references, course requirements, and application.
11 to 12 points
A biblical worldview perspective is articulated but is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and somewhat applies to course requirements and application.
1 to 10 points
A biblical worldview perspective is poorly articulated and is not supported by Scripture or is not appropriate, and does not apply to course requirements and application.
0 points
Not present
Structure 30%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not Present
Grammar and Spelling
6 points
Correct spelling and grammar are used throughout the essay. There are 0–2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
5 points
There are 3–5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
1 to 4 points
There are 6–10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
0 points
There are more than 10 errors in the grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
Sentence Structure and Mechanics
6 points
Sentences are well-phrased and varied in lengt.
EDUC 740
Prayer Reflection Report Grading Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Content 70%
Advanced
Proficient
Developing
Not present
Structure & Organization
33 to 35 points
The paper has a clearly constructed introduction that builds the foundation for further reflection. The structure is clear, logical, and easy to follow. Each paragraph is focused and uses excellent transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a clear conclusion. Overall writing style is appropriate for a graduate-level course.
30 to 32 points
The paper has a constructed introduction that builds the foundation for further reflection. The structure is clear, logical, and easy to follow. Each paragraph is focused and uses transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a conclusion. Overall writing style is appropriate for a graduate-level course.
1 to 29 points
The paper has a constructed introduction that is beginning to build the foundation for further reflection. The structure is vague and difficult to follow. Not all paragraphs are focused and don’t always use transitions from previous paragraphs. The paper has a conclusion. Overall writing style is not appropriate for a graduate-level course.
0 points
Not present
Analysis
19 to 20 points
The content reflects higher-level thinking through critical self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes specific examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes specific examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
17 to 18 points
The content reflects thinking through self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
1 to 16 points
The content does not reflect higher-level thinking through critical self-evaluation and application of principles learned. Includes a vague discussion of your reflections based on your personal prayer journal, including any changes and/or positive things that you have seen occur in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes minimal examples of ways that you have seen changes in the lives of the leaders you have chosen. Includes ambiguous examples of the impact of the assignment on your own life.
0 points
Not present
Support
14 to 15 points
Biblical references and principles are integrated into the paper appropriately, demonstrating an excellent understanding of biblical leadership principles.
13 points
Biblical references and principles are integrated.
EDUC 6733 Action Research for EducatorsReading LiteracyDraft.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 6733 Action Research for Educators
Reading Literacy
Draft
Part A
The context of the classroom setting
In the first section of this action research project I will address the context of classroom setting. Although, it is as important as the teaching itself and understand it is essential in creating learning environments in which every student can thrive. According to Pallardy, context is a classroom’s characteristics such as the composition of the student body, classroom structures and resources. Furthermore, by establishing that context is dependent on student learning we are able to come up with an action research question that will be discussed in this essay. The action research will be on the reading workshop; Is motivation among students a big challenge when it comes to reading literacy?
In addition, a reading workshop is one way to structure a class. Developing strong reading skills in students is one of the key goals in an educational program. Reading workshops encourages the students to become better readers. To accommodate the children’s variability, I assess the children through instructing them to write journals on what they have read and giving them vocabulary tests on that week’s reading. This helps when it comes to identifying student with a reading problem and can be able to tailor lessons to individuals.
One of the concerns that I have experienced in this classroom setting of reading workshops is children’s motivation to read books that they have selected. Their ability to choose the right book and their commitment to stay with the book until they finished is also a concern when it comes to their motivation when reading books. These findings were drawn from the data of the journals and vocabulary test that I had assigned to them. The journals that they wrote the boys in the class performed poorly more than the girls. There is also the fact that the boys in the class didn’t find satisfaction in reading unlike the girls. The boys also were not reading books of their own accord unlike the girls in the class who spent hours with ‘series’ books and other chapter books.
The classroom has 24 students; 52% are boys and 48% are girls. The last two tests on vocabulary showed that girls performed more than the boys. Also, the literature review was discouraging: the boys were lagging the girls. This concerns may be a product of the independent reading workshop and of the freedom of children to choose their own books during that session.
Through observation and interaction with the boys that excelled in the literature reviews I noted that families had a strong impact and the boys that saw their fathers at home read were more likely to choose to read. Therefore, having spoken with the school administration I invited some of the male role models for the boys. I invited teachers, some of their fathers, other school male employees to visit the class and talk about their reading habits. Some of them were frank about their discovery about.
EDUC 637
Technology Portfolio InstructionsGeneral Overview
For this assignment, you will identify forms of and applications for technology for use in a middle school social studies classroom. You will be required to describe the general applications of these technologies, specific applied activities in the general social studies arena, and provide an evaluation.Learning Objective
You will develop a portfolio of technologies that could be used in a middle school social studies classroom, identifying general uses, aligned appropriate national social studies standards, potential activities, and good and bad points to that technology’s use.Assignment Process
1. Select 10 technologies (defined below) that can be used in an educational setting/environment for each of the categories listed below. Notice that I did not say educational or instructional technologies. This is to not restrict you to that search parameter, but rather to allow you to explore critically any technology that might have a pedagogical use. Select technologies representing:
a. Hardware devices
b. Business/productivity software (i.e., Microsoft Office)
c. Web-based technologies (delivered via the Internet)
d. Multimedia software (audio, video, graphical)
e. Games/entertainment
2. Then review each technology answering the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs for each question (best recorded in a word-processing program like Microsoft Word as a multi-page document). Questions to answer include:
a. What are the general functions and purposes of this technology?
b. What types of social studies objectives/goals could be met by this technology and how? Please relate to an NCSS main theme (or more than 1 if appropriate).
c. What, in your opinion, are the good and bad points of using this technology in a pedagogical setting? Consider this a risk analysis.
3. Turn in the completed assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of Module/Week 2.
EDUC 637
Literature Review InstructionsGeneral Overview
Please read the instructions and rubric for the Literature Review assignment BEFORE you sign-up for a topic. You will want to select a topic wisely so you will be able to identify 5 trends in your research.
For this assignment, you will select a topic in the general area of social studies instruction in middle grade education and examine accompanying literature related to that topic to identify the latest trends and issues. Ultimately, you will compile these results into a PowerPoint presentation of around 10 slides to identify these trends.Learning Objective
You will develop a presentation identifying general trends in middle-grade social studies education associated with a set of articles in the content area.Assignment Process
1. Begin classifying and compiling articles and sub-topics into groups of information for presentation (note 5 trends).
2. You should have scanned at least 30 articles in the process, which then need to be provided as part of this assignment in an attached bi.
EDUC 364 The Role of Cultural Diversity in Schooling A dialecti.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 364: The Role of Cultural Diversity in Schooling
A dialectical journal is one in which you engage in conversation with the text. This involves pulling quotes from the text, and providing your reaction, thoughts, analysis and/or questions about what you’ve read. When reading a chapter from Spring(chapter2 and 3), choose 3-5 short passages/selections from each assigned chapter on which to reflect. See the example below. You can format your DJ in a chart format (see next page for template), or you can format it simply as a question/answer format like below. The goal is to use the DJ to think through your reactions and prepare for discussion. Submit your DJ to Cougar Courses prior to class, and if you don’t have your computer with you in class, print it out so you have it with you for a class discussion
Example
Quote: “Faced with the world’s migration of people’s, some countries, such as Singapore, have maintained cultural pluralism by providing public schools that use the child’s home language and reflect the cultural values of the child’s home. Through the use of educational methods that promote cultural pluralism, Singapore has been able to maintain Chinese, Malay, and Indian cultures and languages. Therefore, there have been different educational approaches to the intersection of cultures resulting from globalization...Minority cultures in the United State have primarily experienced cultural genocide, deculturalization, and denial of education. Immigrant groups have mostly experienced assimilation and hybridity.” (Chapter 1).
Response: This is always what I come back to when thinking about American education. We could have chosen a different path, a different approach educating the various groups of children that have come through the school system. But instead of seeing schooling primarily as a democratizing tool, the founders and those in government who came after them saw schooling as a tool for deculturalization, for imposing hegemony. What is most frustrating is how to tease out how our current system still contains the legacy of those oppressive institutional choices. Seeing those remnants for what they are--clearly--is the only way to change the system to truly benefit all kids.
.
EDUC 144 Writing Tips The writing assignments in this cla.docxtidwellveronique
EDUC 144 Writing Tips
The writing assignments in this class require students to engage in critical thinking and analysis,
producing papers that go beyond simple summaries of course readings by utilizing concepts, ideas, and
findings in course readings to critically analyze contemporary schooling and academic achievement in
the United States. Below is a list of suggestions to help you write strong papers that are critical and
analytical.
The introductory paragraph should briefly mention the topic and purpose/focus of your paper and state
your thesis in clear, specific terms (i.e. “In this paper, I will argue…” or “I will contend...,” or “I will
demonstrate…”).
Each paragraph in the body of the paper should be tightly organized around one main idea. Each
paragraph should build on previous ones and provide concrete examples/findings from the week’s
readings that serve as data that support your analysis, or examples from your own experiences and
observations of schooling that serve as evidence in support of your analysis. If you are drawing on a
specific theoretical concept(s) or idea(s) in your analysis, remember to clearly define and explain the
concept(s) or idea(s) before using that concept(s) or idea(s) to investigate and analyze particular aspects
of contemporary schooling.
The concluding paragraph needs to restate the thesis and main points addressed in the paper.
Sometimes writers do not know what their argument is until they have reached the end of the paper—or
the thesis has changed by the end. If either of these happens to you, be sure to put your thesis in the first
paragraph as well and/or make sure that you are making the same argument throughout the paper.
Things to keep in mind, at the level of the paragraph:
Make sure your comments are relevant to the topic at hand: one way to do this is to make an outline of
each paragraph’s main idea; each one should clearly relate to the topic and focus/purpose or thesis of
your paper. It is writer’s responsibility to select relevant concepts or ideas, examples of research
findings from the week’s readings, and/or personal experiences and observations that relate directly to
the topic and purpose/focus of the paper. It is not appropriate to expect the reader to do this instead.
Remember, examples/research findings and personal experiences and observations are not “obviously”
evidence in support of your analysis until you explicitly explain how these examples/findings/
experiences/observations support the claims in your analysis.
Make sure each paragraph’s main idea is clearly connected to your thesis.
*Smoothly transition between paragraphs: connect first line of new paragraph with main idea of
previous paragraph.
*Stick to the facts at hand—do not overstate your case.
Things to keep in mind, at the level of the sentence:
*Tighten sentence structure: combine sentences when possible by eliminating redundant information.
*Employ p.
EDUC 1300- LEARNING FRAMEWORK
Portfolio Page Prompts
INTRODUCTION
This page introduces, not you, but your portfolio. . Invite people into the portfolio and give them a reason for
exploring further Convey your purpose in creating the portfolio. Include a picture of yourself, and a quote
that is meaningful to you. No attachment is needed on this page. (10 points)
ABOUT ME
This page introduces you. Share information about yourself – your family, hobbies, work, and what you enjoy.
Don’t just TELL people, SHOW who you are, too. Things you might include: photos, images, or video/links
that interest you. Attach your Quality World Essay or another paper about yourself to this page. (10 points)
GOALS
List your long-term goals: personal, education, career. Identify the short-term and intermediate goals that will
help you progress toward these long-term goals. Include images that help you and your viewer visualize your
goals. Attach your degree plan/Timeline assignment to show your academic plans/goals. (10 points)
LEARNING
This page showcases what you’ve learned about your learning. Collect information you’ve gathered about
yourself and how you learn, such as learning styles inventories, personality type indicators, and your
Strengthsquest assessment. Interpret those results and draw conclusions about yourself from this evidence and
write about it. Attach your Insight Report from Strengthsquest so your viewer can learn more about your top
5 strengths or another assessment report which have helped you identify how you learn. (15 points)
THINKING
What have you learned this semester about critical thinking? What have you created that demonstrates the
quality of your thinking? Select examples and identify these qualities in your reflection. Attach an
assignment/paper from this class or another that show your thinking abilities. (15 points)
RESEARCH
On this page, post a question that you’ve selected to research and write what you found. What did you learn
about using the online databases? How will that help you in future classes? Attach your annotated
bibliography/research organizers and/or a research paper from another course. (15 points)
REFLECTION:
Your Introduction page described the purpose of the portfolio. On this page, provide a conclusion. Reflect on
your experience in the course and semester in creating this portfolio. Consider the following prompts:
What expectations or assumptions did you have before the course began? Were they valid or invalid?
How has the course contributed to your understanding of yourself and others?
What impact did the course have on your understanding of your quality world?
How do you now assume responsibility for your learning? What thinking and behaviors will you further
develop on your journey to becoming an autonomous learner?
(15 points)
EDUC 1300 Learning Framework Grading Rubric
Page Unsatisfactory
.
EDU734 Teaching and Learning Environment Week 5.docxtidwellveronique
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
Week 5: Curriculum
Development
Topic goals
To gain an understanding of the concept of
curriculum development and its importance
To gain an understanding of how curriculum
is implemented in different cultural contexts
Task – Forum
Do you think that the current school curriculum needs
to be adapted more to the modern culture? If so, in
what ways do you think it can be done?
What do you consider to be the implications for the
nature of valid knowledge in the future school curriculum?
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 1
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.1 Introduction
Curriculum lies at the heart of educational policies and practices.
They are are highly political documents which convey ideological positions about
the type of education that should be given in different cultural contexts and the
citizenship values that can be shared by the citizen of a state (Apple, 2004).
Each society has its own values and beliefs which they want to be translated into
educational objectives via the curriculum.
“Curriculum is a comprehensive plan for an educational programme/institute/
course to offer new or improved manpower to accomplish the rising needs of a
dynamic society” (Pillai, 2015).
5.1.1 Orientations to curriculum
Child-centred
Society-centred
Knowledge-centred
Eclectic
5.1.2 Determinants of the curriculum
Basic needs
Social aspects
Cultural factors
Individual talents
Ideals: intellectual, moral, aesthetic, religious
Tradition
(Pillai, 2015)
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 2
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.2 Definition of Curriculum Development
Curriculum development is defined as the process which is planned, purposeful,
progressive, and systematic in order to create positive improvements in the
educational system.
The curriculum is affected by any changes or developments that affect society
(Alvior, 2014).
It needs to correspond to those changes but at the same time to respect all
people despite of gender, ethnicity, disability, religion etc. (Symeonidou and
Mavrou, 2014).
2. How can
1. What learning 3. How can
4. How can the
educational experiences learning
effectiveness of
purposes that are likely to experiences be
learning
should the be useful in organised for
experiences be
school seek to attaining these effective
evaluated?
attain? objectives be instruction?
selected?
Diagram 5.1: Four questions for the organization and development of the
curriculum (Tyler, 1949, cited in Howard, 2007)
EDU734: Teaching and Learning Environment Page 3
EDU734: Teaching and
Learning Environment
5.2.1 Four principles for the development of any curriculum:
Def.
EDU 505 – Contemporary Issues in EducationCOURSE DESCRIPTION.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 505 – Contemporary Issues in Education
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Examines theory, research, and practices relating to critical issues faced by educators today. Discusses contemporary concerns in American and global education: National and local initiatives in education, the evolving relationship between schools and communities, impacts of public policy on the educational enterprise, and current social, political, economic, and legal issues influencing schools are explored from American and global perspectives. Evaluates the future of education in both industrial and developing countries, including growth of learning needs and inequities both within and between countries. Emphasizes problem identification, analysis, and remediation, with the latter focusing on “best of breed” innovative practices.
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
Required Resources – Textbook
Tozer, S. E., Senese, G., & Violas, P. C. (2013). School and society: Historical and contemporary perspectives (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Required Resources – Articles
Baker, B., Sciarra, D., & Farrie, D. (2014). Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card. Retrieved from http://www.schoolfundingfairness.org/National_Report_Card_2014.pdf
Baker, B., & Corcoran, S. (2012). The Stealth Inequities of School Funding: How State and Local School Finance Systems Perpetuate Inequitable Student Spending. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2012/09/19/38189/the-stealth-inequities-of-school-funding/
Brackemyre, T. (2012). Education to the Masses: The Rise of Public Education in Early America. History Scene. Retrieved from http://www.ushistoryscene.com/uncategorized/riseofpubliceducation/
Cobb, N. (2014). Climate, Culture and Collaboration: The Key to Creating Safe and Supportive Schools. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers. Retrieved from: http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1bde4a76-6090-47af-8294-13f37c6936c7%40sessionmgr110&vid=16&hid=112
Gardner, H. (2011). To improve U.S. education, it’s time to treat teachers as professionals. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/to-improve-us-education-its-time-to-treat-teachers-as-professionals/2011/07/18/gIQA8oh2LI_story.html
Garrity, C., & Jens, K. (1997). Bully Proofing Your School: Creating a Positive Climate. Intervention in School & Clinic. Retrieved from http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=1bde4a76-6090-47af-8294-13f37c6936c7%40sessionmgr110&hid=112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=9703123351
Hiler, T., & Hatalsky, L.(2014). TEACH Grant Trap: Program to Encourage Young People to Teach Falls Short. Third Way. Retrieved from http://www.thirdway.org/memo/teach-grant-trap-program-to-encourage-young-people-to-teach-falls-short
Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. (2015). Cyberbullying Legislation and Case Law: Implications for School Policy and Practice. Retrieved from.
EDU 3338 Lesson Plan TemplateCandidate NameCooperatin.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 3338 Lesson Plan Template
Candidate Name:
Cooperating Teacher Name:
Placement Site:
Grade Level:
Subject:
Length of Lesson:
Lesson Title:
Date of Lesson:
Learning Central Focus
Central Focus
What is the central focus for the content in the learning segment?
Content Standard
What standard(s) are most relevant to the learning goals?
Student Learning Goal(s)/ Objective(s)
Skills/procedures
What are the specific learning goal(s) for student in this lesson?
Concepts and reasoning/problem solving/thinking/strategies[footnoteRef:1] [1: The prompt provided here should be modified to reflect subject specific aspects of learning. Language here is mathematics related. See candidate edTPA handbooks for the “Making Good Choices” resource for subject specific components. ]
What are the specific learning goal(s) for students in this lesson?
Prior Academic Knowledge and Conceptions
What knowledge, skills, and concepts must students already know to be successful with this lesson?
What prior knowledge and/or gaps in knowledge do these students have that are necessary to support the learning of the skills and concepts for this lesson?
Theoretical Principles and/or Research–Based Best Practices
Why are the learning tasks for this lesson appropriate for your students?
Materials
What materials does the teacher need for this lesson?
What materials do the students need for this lesson?
Assessments, Instructional Strategies, and Learning Tasks
Description of what the teacher (you) will be doing and/or what the students will be doing.
Launch
__________ Minutes
How will you start the lesson to engage and motivate students in learning?
Pre-Assessment
How will you find out what students already know about the lesson objective?
What tangible pre-assessments will you administer?
How will you evaluate student performance on the pre-assessment?
Instruction
__________ Minutes
What will you do to engage students in developing understanding of the lesson objective(s)?
How will you link the new content (skills and concepts) to students’ prior academic learning and their personal/cultural and community assets?
What will you say and do? What questions will you ask?
How will you engage students to help them understand the concepts?
What will students do?
How will you determine if students are meeting the intended learning objectives?
Structured Practice and
Application
__________ Minutes
How will you give students the opportunity to practice so you can provide feedback?
How will students apply what they have learned?
How will you structure opportunities for students to work with partners or in groups? What criteria will you use when forming groups?
Formative Assessment
What formative assessment techniques will you utilize to determine if students are meeting the intended learning objectives?
Differentiation/ Planned Support
How will you provide students access to learning based on individual and group need.
EDU 3215 Lesson Plan Template & Elements Name Andres Rod.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 3215 Lesson Plan Template & Elements
Name: Andres Rodriguez
Email address: [email protected]
Content Areas: English Language Arts and Social Studies
Common Core Standard(s): (list and write all applicable)
ELA CCSS:
RI 7.1 - Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly
as well as inferences drawn from the text.
RI 7.3 - Analyze the interactions between individuals, events, and ideas in a text (e.g., how ideas
influence individuals or events, or how individuals influence ideas or events).
RI 7. 4 - Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including
figurative, connotative, and technical meanings; analyze the impact of a specific word choice on
meaning and tone.
CCSS: RH.6–8.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary
sources.
RH.6–8.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide
an accurate summary of the source distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.
Essential Question(s): How did colonists, African Americans, and Native Americans choose
sides during the Revolutionary War?
Introduction and Lesson Objective (outline the purpose for the lesson in 50 -100 words)
E.g., This lesson is focused on the role of the Native Americans during the American
Revolution. Students explored the roles of the Patriots and the Red Coats and will synthesize this
information with the roles of Native Americans during the American Revolution. The purpose is
for students to understand the variety of people and reasons who were involved in the American
Revolution.
Resources/Materials/Technology Utilized:
E.g., Computer, Smartboard, NewsELA article, Reading about Mohawk Mary Molly Bryant,
Notebooks, Pens, Pencils, Index cards, looseleaf
Instructional Sequence (x amount of minutes/ how many days will this lesson cover).
Include evidence of Explicit Instruction within the tasks/activity:
ortliebe
Highlight
ortliebe
Highlight
Time Allocation Objective Activity
Assessment/Evaluatio
n
7-9 minutes
This will help
the teacher
gauge what
knowledge the
students are
coming into the
lesson with.
Do Now - Answer the
following question:
Who do you think the
Native Americans fought
with/along side during the
American Revolution?
Why do you believe they
chose this side.
Teacher will walk
around and take note
of how many students
choose Patriots or Red
Coats. This will help
with grouping in
future lessons.
10 minutes
Reading a
document about
Mohawk Mary
Molly Bryant as
a class to help
students with
annotating
relevant facts
and details that
will help them
answer critical
thinking
questions later
on.
Reading a document about
a Native American woman,
Mohawk Mary Molly
Bryant as a class. Teacher
asks the following
questions during the
reading and students
underline/annotate the
answers based on t.
EDST 1100R SITUATED LEARNING EDST 1100 N Situated Learning .docxtidwellveronique
EDST 1100R: SITUATED LEARNING
EDST 1100 N: Situated Learning
Thursdays, 2.30 – 5.30
Keele Campus, Mac 050B
Winter, 2020
Instructor: Dr. Lorin Schwarz
Email: [email protected]
Office Hours: ½ hour after class, or by appointment
*
Learning is intentional and contextual, and it involves developing systems and structures that not only allow but also encourage organization members to learn and grow together –to develop “communities of practice.”
-Preskill and Torres
The idea of a subject that calls to us is more than metaphor. In the community of truth, the knower is not the only active agent –the subject itself participates in the dialectic of knowing...geologists are people who hear rocks speak, historians are people who hear the voices of the long dead, writers are people who hear the music of words. The things of the world call to us, and we are drawn to them –each of us to different things, as each is drawn to different friends.
--Parker J. Palmer
Teaching is a complex, relational, and creative event. When I teach, I am simultaneously involved in several dynamic relations: with myself, with my everyday world, with my subject matter, and with my students. I cannot really teach if I am not engaged with my students or if my students are not involved with me.
--Carol S. Becker
The relationship between our physical constraints and the assertion of our freedom is not a 'problem' requiring a solution. It is simply the way human beings are. Our condition is to be ambiguous to the core, and our task is to learn to manage the movement and uncertainty in our existence, not banish it...the ambiguous human condition means tirelessly trying to take control of things. We have to do two near-impossible things at once: understand ourselves as limited by circumstances, and yet continue to pursue our projects as though we are truly in control.
--Sarah Bakewell
Course Description
Welcome to EDST 1100: “Situated Learning.” As described in the university calendar, the aims of this seminar are as follows:
“This course is framed around situated learning theories in relation to the provisioning of educational experiences in a variety of contexts (e.g., early familial experiences, formal educational experiences, cultural educational experiences, employment educational experiences). Students are first introduced to the major principles of families of learning theories (e.g., behaviourism, cognitivism, social learning theory, social constructivism). This introduction is followed by in-depth study of situated learning theory drawing from Lave and Wenger (1991) a seminal text in the field. Students engage in exploring exemplars of situated learning drawing from theory to understand the factors at play in the exemplars because, as situated learning theory would suggest, the representations of situated learning theory must be situated in relation to reference points. Given any particular learning engagement’s situational parameters, stu.
EDU 151 Thematic Unit Required ComponentsThematic Unit Requireme.docxtidwellveronique
EDU 151 Thematic Unit Required Components
Thematic Unit Requirements
Component Parts of Selected Thematic Unit
A) Study Topic - Select a specific appropriate topic reflecting children’s interests and experiences. Topics that are too broad or not developmentally applicable will not be considered. Examples of this type of topic include Ocean, Rain Forest, Outer Space. Examples of specific appropriate topics are shoes, worms, rocks.
A)
B) Age Level –“Birth through Second Grade” Select an age or grade level.
B)
C) Focus - Develop a one-sentence focus statement that summarizes the direction and intent of the unit.
C)
D) Objectives - Identify three or four specific objectives you wish children to master by the completion of the unit, use the appropriate NC Early Learning Standards for the age of the child.
D)
E) Resources - You will need to cite all resources used throughout the study topic. For example: Internet resources (specific web site), printed resources, magazines, newspaper, journals, audio/visual resources, field trips, etc.
E)
F) Extensions Activities - Complete the attached Lesson Plan Forms in detail. You should also include two extension activities (extended activities or enrichment activities).
F)
G) Discussion Questions – Include at least three open-ended questions that will help children think about the topic in varied and divergent ways.
G)
H) Literature Selections - Select children’s books that relate to the theme and are developmentally appropriate for the children you will be working with
H)
I) Culminating activity - The culminating activity is a project or activity that engages children in a meaningful summarization of their discoveries and leads to new ideas, understandings and connections.
J) Evaluation - Devise appropriate means of evaluating children’s progress throughout the unit based on the objectives chosen above.
Student Name: _________ Date: _________
Assessment Name: Study Topic Unit
This assessment is used in every section of EDU 151
This assessment is designed to focus on Standards #4 and #5
This assessment is designed to focus on Supportive Skill # 3, #4, and #5
D/F
C
B
A
100
Unsatisfactory
Average
Good
Very Good
Standard or
Supportive Skill
Key Elements
Basic Knowledge
Comprehension
Application
Synthesis
Comments
Standard 4: Using Developmentally Effective Approaches to Connect with Children and Families
(Attach Weekly Planning Form to Standard 4c in School Chapters)
4c. Using a broad repertoire of developmentally appropriate teaching/learning approaches
Activities are not developmentally appropriate and do not incorporate a range of teaching approaches
0 – 12
Activities are mostly developmentally appropriate and incorporate a few teaching approaches
13
Activities are developmentally appropriate and incorporate varied teaching approaches
14
Activities are developmentally appropriate and incorporate a wide array of teaching approache.
EDSP 429
Differentiated Instruction PowerPoint Instructions
The purpose of this assignment is to produce a PowerPoint presentation that demonstrates your ability to apply course concepts and vocabulary to the topic of differentiated instruction.
Differentiated instruction is a form of instruction that seeks to maximize each student’s growth by recognizing that students have different ways of learning, different interests, and different ways of responding to instruction. In practice, it involves offering several different learning experiences in response to students’ varied needs. You will use theories, vocabulary, and models to construct a PowerPoint presentation that gives an overview of differentiated instruction.
1. Construct the PowerPoint presentation as if you were addressing peers in an in-service training on differentiated instruction.
2. The PowerPoint presentation must be 7–12 slides.
3. The PowerPoint presentation must address the following topics:
· Definition of differentiated instruction
· Advantages to students with special needs
· At least 3 specific examples of differentiated instruction
· References page
The Differentiated Instruction PowerPoint is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of Module/Week 5.
EDSP 429
D
IFFERENTIATED
I
NSTRUCTION
P
OWER
P
OINT
I
NSTRUCTIONS
The purpose of
this assignment is to produce a
PowerPoint
p
resentation that demonstrates
your
ability to apply course concepts and vocabulary to the topic of
d
ifferentiated
i
nstruction
.
Differentiated
instruction is a form of instruction that seeks to maximize each student
’
s growth
by recognizing that students have different ways of learning, different interests, and different
ways of responding to instruction. In practice, it involves offering several
different learning
experiences in response to students
’
varied needs.
You will
use theories, vocabulary, and models
to construct a
PowerPoint
p
resentation that gives an overview of differentiated
instruction
.
1.
Construct the
PowerPoint
presentation as if yo
u were addressing peers in an in
-
service
training on differentiated instruction.
2.
The
PowerPoint
presentation
must
be 7
–
12
slides
.
3.
The
PowerPoint
presentation
must
address the following topics:
·
Definition of differentiated
i
nstruction
·
Advantages to student
s with special needs
·
At least 3
specific examples
of differentiated instruction
·
References
page
The
Differentiated Instruction
PowerPoint
is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of
M
odule/
W
eek
5
.
EDSP 429
DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION POWERPOINT INSTRUCTIONS
The purpose of this assignment is to produce a PowerPoint presentation that demonstrates your
ability to apply course concepts and vocabulary to the topic of differentiated instruction.
Differentiated instruction is a form of instruction that seeks to maximize each student’s growth
by recognizing that students have different ways of learning, different interests,.
EDSP 429Fact Sheet on Disability Categories InstructionsThe pu.docxtidwellveronique
EDSP 429
Fact Sheet on Disability Categories Instructions
The purpose of this assignment is to produce a Fact Sheet that demonstrates your ability to articulate the characteristics of each of the IDEA recognized categories of disabilities.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees a free appropriate public education to eligible children with disabilities. It specifically identifies 13 categories of disabilities that are entitled to special education services. Using relevant reliable websites and your text, you are to construct a Fact Sheet that explains each of the disability categories in terms that are understandable for the general public.
1. Develop the Fact Sheet as if it would be used to educate parents or others in the general public about disabilities that receive special education services.
2. Include an introduction stating the purpose of the fact sheet and the information provided.
3. Each disability category must be fully defined.
4. A minimum of 3 sources should be cited and referenced, one of which should be the textbook.
5. A reference page must be included.
The Fact Sheet on Disability Categories is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of Module/Week 2.
EDSP 429
F
ACT
S
HEET ON
D
ISABILITY
C
ATEGORIES
I
NSTRUCTIONS
The purpose of
this assignment is to produce a
Fact Sheet
that demonstrates
your
ability to
articulate the charac
teristics of each of the IDEA
recognized categories of disabilities.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees a free appropriate public education to
eligible children with disabilities. It specifically identifies 13 categories of disabilities that are
entitled to special education services. Using
relevan
t reliable websites and your text, you are to
construct a Fact Sheet that explains each of the disability categories in terms that are
understandable for the general public.
1.
Develop the Fact Sheet as if it would be used to educate parents or others in th
e general
public about disabilities that receive special education services.
2.
Include an introduction stating the purpose of the fact sheet and the information provided.
3.
Each disability category must be fully defined
.
4.
A minimum of 3 sources should be cited
and referenced, one of which should be the
textbook.
5.
A reference page must be included.
The
Fact Sheet on Disability Categories
is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of
M
odule/
W
eek
2
.
EDSP 429
FACT SHEET ON DISABILITY CATEGORIES INSTRUCTIONS
The purpose of this assignment is to produce a Fact Sheet that demonstrates your ability to
articulate the characteristics of each of the IDEA recognized categories of disabilities.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guarantees a free appropriate public education to
eligible children with disabilities. It specifically identifies 13 categories of disabilities that are
entitled to special education services. Using relevant reliable websites and your.
EDSP 370Individualized Education Plan (IEP) InstructionsThe .docxtidwellveronique
EDSP 370
Individualized Education Plan (IEP) Instructions
The purpose of this assignment is to provide a means of practice in IEP development. You will be expected to produce an IEP – full in its overall scope but not in-depth. This will allow you to apply the knowledge learned within the course as a whole. The IEP will be written in three phases in order to provide assistance and feedback as well as allow for improvements. ONLY DO PHASE 1. STOP WORKING WHEN YOU SEE THIS:
THIS IS THE END OF THE WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT.
· Phase 1
You will complete the following components of the IEP:
Notice
Cover Page
Factors
Present Level of Performance (PLOP)
Diploma Status
Phase 11 and 111 will get competed in weeks to follow (DO NOT COMPLETE THIS PORTION).
· Phase II
You will revise IEP 1 based on instructor comments and complete the
following additional components:
Goals
Objectives
Accommodations/Modifications
Participation in State Accountability and Assessment System
· Phase III
You will revise IEP II based on instructor comments and complete the
following additional components:
Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
Transition
Extended School Year (ESY)
Parent Consent
You will be using the Michael Jones case study which has been provided with the instucstions to this. All portions of the IEP will pertain to Michael. It is understood that it will be difficult to fully consider the development of an IEP without more exhaustive details considering Michael’s educational and functional strengths and weaknesses.
To complete the IEP, it will be necessary to review all of the assigned reading and presentations. You may also research current information on Virginia Department of Education’s website. These resources provide valuable information and examples to help create the IEP. You will use the IEP template that is a sample created from the VA DOE’s sample IEP, also located in the Assignment Instruction folder for Module/Week 3.
Page 1 of 1
SAMPLE
School Division Letterhead
IEP MEETING NOTICE
Date:
To:
Susie and Robert Jones________________
and
Michael______________________________________
Parent(s)/Adult Student Student (if appropriate or if transition will be discussed)
You are invited to attend an IEP meeting regarding Michael Jones
Student’s Name
PURPOSE OF MEETING (check all that apply):
· IEP Development or Review
· IEP Amendment
· Transition: Postsecondary Goals, Transition Services
· Manifestation Determination
· Other: ________________________________________________________________________________
The meeting has been scheduled for:
Date Time Location
Meetings are scheduled at a mutually agreed upon place and time by y.
EDSP 377
Scenario Instructions
Scenario 2: Teaching communication skills
Scenario assignments are designed to help the candidate synthesize and apply course content to real-world situations involving individuals with ASD. In Scenario #2, candidates will create a lesson plan for a pre-K student with autism who has communication needs.
Scenario: You are a pre-K teacher for a 4-year-old student with autism named Johnsaan. Johnsaan has difficulty asking for help when he needs something. Instead of asking for help using words, he grunts and waves his hands until he gets a response and engages in challenging behaviors. As Johnsaan's teacher, you need to teach him to use words to ask for help, which should decrease his challenging behavior. What components need to be included in your lesson plan?
Assignment: Drawing on the lesson planning and delivery techniques discussed in Chapter 5, create a lesson plan that could be used to teach Johnsaan to ask for help. Be sure your lesson plan includes the 5 major components of a lesson plan, outlined in Chapter 5, that will enhance your student's ability to express himself when he needs help. The final assignment should be a completed lesson plan, approximately 2 pages (Times New Roman, 12-point font) and an additional 1-page candidate reflection.
Step 1: Identify the main components of the lesson including the goal and/or objective, specific information related to the conditions for responding, types of reinforcers and reinforcement schedule, mastery criteria and evaluation methods.
Step 2: Develop a formal lesson incorporating at least 1 specified presentation style outlined in Chapter 5: Direct Instruction (DI), Discreet Trial Training (DTT), Milieu Teaching (MU), Grouping, or Embedded ABA Teaching Strategies. The formal lesson plan must include an opportunity for guided practice and independent practice. Opportunities for generalization and maintenance should be outlined.
Step 3: Reflect upon the lesson planning process. The reflection should integrate course materials and a biblical world-view, including at least 2 in-text citations and reference list following APA formatting. The following considerations should be addressed within the reflection:
· Rationale for the identification of selected target skill and presentation style(s).
· Review of the lesson planning process including consideration of pre-requisite skills and next steps after lesson implementation.
· Identification of possible challenges with implementation and how these potential challenges will be addressed prior to and during instruction.
EDSP 377
S
CENARIO
I
NSTRUCTIONS
S
CENARIO
2
:
T
EACHING COMMUNICATIO
N SKILLS
Scenario assignments are design
ed
to help the candidate synthesize and apply course
content
to
real
-
world situations involving individuals with ASD.
In
Scenario #2
, candidates will
create
a
lesson plan for a pre
-
K student with aut
ism who has communication needs.
Scenario:
You are a pre.
EDSP 377
Autism Interventions
1. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)
2. Auditory Integration Training (AIT)
3. Biochemical Therapies
4. Circle of Friends
5. Computer Aided Instruction
6. Dietary Restrictions and/or Supplements (including enzymes and vitamins)
7. DIR/Floortime Approach (Greenspan)
8. Discrete Trial Training (DTT)
9. Early Intervention Behavioral Intervention (EIBI)
10. Early Start Denver Model (ESDM), for young children with autism
11. Functional Communication Training (FCT)
12. Holding Therapies
13. Hyperbaric Oxygen Chamber Treatments
14. Joint Attention Interventions
15. Music Therapy
16. Naturalistic Intervention
17. Options Therapy (Son Rise)
18. Peer Mediated Instruction and Intervention
19. Pharmacological Approaches
20. Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS)
21. Pivotal Response Training (PRT)
22. Play Groups
23. Power Cards
24. Relationship Development Intervention (RDI)
25. Research on Connection with Mercury and the MMR to autism
26. Research on Siblings of Children with Autism
27. Research on Transition Services for Employment
28. Research on Transition to the Adult World
29. Research on Twin Studies
30. SCERTS Model (Social Communication, Emotional Regulation, and Transactional Support)
31. Sensory Integration
32. Sign Language
33. Social Stories
34. TEACCH (Treatment and Education of Autistic and related Communication-handicapped Children)
35. Visual Strategies and Supports
36. Video Modeling
A
UTISM
I
NTERVENTIONS
1.
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)
2.
Aud
itory Integration Training (AIT)
3.
Biochemical Therapies
4.
Circle of Friends
5.
Computer Aided Instruction
6.
Dietary
R
estrictions and/or
S
upplements (including enzymes and vitamins)
7.
DIR/Floortime Approach (Greenspan)
8.
Discrete Trial Training
(DTT)
9.
Early Intervention Behavioral Intervention (EIBI)
10.
Early Start Denver Model (ESDM)
,
for young children with autism
11.
Functional Communication Training (FCT)
12.
Holding Therapies
13.
Hyperbaric Oxygen C
hamber Treatments
14.
Joint
Attention Interventions
15.
Music Therapy
16.
Naturalistic Intervention
17.
Options Therapy (Son Rise)
18.
Peer
M
ediated
I
nstruction and
I
ntervention
19.
Pharmacological
A
pproaches
20.
Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS)
21.
Pivotal Response Training
(PRT)
22.
Play Groups
23.
Power Cards
24.
Relationship Development Intervention (RDI)
25.
Research on
C
onnection with
M
ercury and the MMR to autism
26.
Research on
S
iblings of
C
hildren with
A
utism
27.
Research on
T
ransition
S
ervices for
E
mployment
28.
Research on
T
ransition to the
A
dult
W
orld
29.
Research on
T
win
S
tudies
30.
SCERTS Model (Social
Communication
,
Emotional Regulation
, and
Transactional Support)
31.
Sensory Integration
32.
Sign
L
anguage
33.
Social Stories
34.
TEACCH (Treatment and Education of Autistic and related
Communication
-
handicapped C
h
ildren)
35.
Visual Strategies
and .
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleCeline George
Bills have a main role in point of sale procedure. It will help to track sales, handling payments and giving receipts to customers. Bill splitting also has an important role in POS. For example, If some friends come together for dinner and if they want to divide the bill then it is possible by POS bill splitting. This slide will show how to split bills in odoo 17 POS.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...Sandy Millin
http://sandymillin.wordpress.com/iateflwebinar2024
Published classroom materials form the basis of syllabuses, drive teacher professional development, and have a potentially huge influence on learners, teachers and education systems. All teachers also create their own materials, whether a few sentences on a blackboard, a highly-structured fully-realised online course, or anything in between. Despite this, the knowledge and skills needed to create effective language learning materials are rarely part of teacher training, and are mostly learnt by trial and error.
Knowledge and skills frameworks, generally called competency frameworks, for ELT teachers, trainers and managers have existed for a few years now. However, until I created one for my MA dissertation, there wasn’t one drawing together what we need to know and do to be able to effectively produce language learning materials.
This webinar will introduce you to my framework, highlighting the key competencies I identified from my research. It will also show how anybody involved in language teaching (any language, not just English!), teacher training, managing schools or developing language learning materials can benefit from using the framework.
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptxJheel Barad
This presentation provides a briefing on how to upload submissions and documents in Google Classroom. It was prepared as part of an orientation for new Sainik School in-service teacher trainees. As a training officer, my goal is to ensure that you are comfortable and proficient with this essential tool for managing assignments and fostering student engagement.
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
Case Summaries for Criminal Procedure, 6eJohn Scheb and John M. .docx
1. Case Summaries for Criminal Procedure, 6e
John Scheb and John M. Scheb IIChapter 1
Duncan v. Louisiana (1968). Here the Supreme Court made the
right of trial by jury applicable to defendants in state criminal
cases. In a concurring opinion joined by Justice Douglas,
Justice Black expressed his satisfaction with what the Court had
done under the mantle of selective incorporation: “I believe as
strongly as ever that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to
make the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. I have been
willing to support the selective incorporation doctrine, however,
as an alternative, although perhaps less historically supportable
than complete incorporation. ... [T]he selective incorporation
process has the virtue of having already worked to make most of
the Bill of Rights protections applicable to the States.”
Boykin v. Alabama (1969). Boykin pled guilty to five counts of
common law robbery; however, at this time Alabama law
provided for a jury to determine a defendant’s sentence. At the
sentencing phase, the trial judge asked Boykin no questions
regarding the voluntariness of his plea agreement nor did
Boykin address the court. The prosecution presented
eyewitness testimony; however, Boykin’s attorney failed to
present any mitigating evidence on behalf of Mr. Boykin
including the fact that there was no indication the defendant had
a prior criminal history. The jury returned a death sentence.
The Supreme Court, speaking through Justice Douglas, held
“several federal constitutional rights are involved in a waiver
that takes place when a plea of guilty is entered in a state
criminal trial. First, is the privilege against compulsory self-
incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment…. Second, is
the right to trial by jury. Third, is the right to confront one’s
accusers. We cannot presume a waiver of these important
federal rights from a silent record.” The Supreme Court
2. reversed the defendant’s sentence because there was no
indication in the court record that his plea was made “voluntary
and understandingly.”
Chapter 2
Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). Clarence Earl Gideon, a 51 year-
old indigent “drifter” who had been in and out of jails all his
adult life, was charged with felonious breaking and entering. At
trial, he requested that the court appoint an attorney to represent
him. The court refused, citing the Florida law that required
appointment of counsel for indigent defendants only in capital
cases. While serving his sentence in the Florida State Prison,
Gideon unsuccessfully challenged his conviction in the Florida
Supreme Court on a writ of habeas corpus. He then obtained
review by the U.S. Supreme Court on a writ of certiorari. In a
unanimous decision, the Court reversed Gideon’s conviction.
Writing for the Court, Hugo Black opined that “[t]he right of
one charged with a crime to counsel may not be deemed
fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it
is in ours.” Gideon v. Wainwright overruled the Supreme
Court’s 1942 holding in Betts v. Brady. Because Gideon was
made retroactive, it allowed numerous persons serving time in
state prisons to win their freedom by seeking writ of habeas
corpus in the state and federal courts. Without question, Gideon
was one of the most important decisions of the Warren Court in
the field of criminal justice.
Williams v. Florida (1970). Two years prior to this case, the
Supreme Court held “that the Fourteenth Amendment
guarantees a right to a trial by jury in all criminal cases in
Duncan v. Louisiana. Here, the defendant was charged with
robbery and tried by a jury composed of six members. The
question before the Supreme Court was “whether the
constitutional guarantee of a trial by ‘jury’ necessarily requires
a trial by exactly 12 persons.” The Court held that a jury of
3. twelve is not a requirement under the Sixth Amendment’s right
as applied to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment to a trial
by jury in criminal cases.
Solorio v. United States (1987). While Petitioner Richard
Solorio was on active duty in the Seventeenth Coast Guard
District in Juneau, Alaska he “sexually abused two young
daughters of a fellow coastguardsmen.” Authorities learned of
these alleged crimes after the Coast Guard transferred the
Petitioner to New York. New York authorities investigated the
Petitioner for similar sexual abuse allegations while stationed in
New York. As a result of the investigations, the Governors
Island commander convened a general court-martial to try the
Petitioner for crimes alleged to have occurred in Alaska and
New York. The question presented was whether the
“jurisdiction of a court-martial convened pursuant to the
Uniform Code of Military Justice (U.C.M.J.) to try a member of
the Armed Forces depends on the ‘service-connection’ of the
offense charged.” The Court held it did not, overruling its prior
holding in O'Callahan v. Parker.
Ex Parte Milligan (1866). Lambdin P. Milligan, a civilian
residing in Indiana, was an active collaborator with the
Confederacy. In 1864, he was arrested and tried for treason by a
military commission established by order of President Lincoln.
Milligan was convicted and sentenced to death, but the sentence
was not carried out. In 1866, some time after hostilities had
ceased, the Supreme Court reviewed the conviction. Its
landmark decision in Ex parte Milligan was a ringing
endorsement of civil liberties. The Supreme Court took note of
the fact that the civilian courts were open and operating in
Indiana when Milligan was arrested and tried by the military. In
ordering Milligan’s release, the Court condemned Lincoln’s
directive establishing military jurisdiction over civilians outside
of the immediate war area. It strongly affirmed the fundamental
right of a civilian to be tried in a regular court of law, with all
4. the procedural safeguards that characterize the criminal process.
It must be remembered that this strong assertion of
constitutional principles occurred a year after the close of the
Civil War and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Viewed in
this light, Ex parte Milligan may be more aptly described as an
admission of judicial weakness during time of war than as a
bold pronouncement of constitutional limits on presidential
power.
Ex parte Quirin (1942). In a special term of the Supreme Court
in 1942, the Supreme Courthanded down this opinion regarding
seven consolidated petitions for writs of habeas corpus. All the
Petitioners were born in Germany and lived in the United
States, and all but one were citizens of the German Reich. After
war was declared between the United States and Germany, the
Petitioners received training “at a sabotage school near Berlin,
where they were instructed in the use of explosives and in
methods of secret writing.” Some of the Petitioners made their
way to New York City, others to Florida, “in the hours of
darkness” carrying with them “a supply of explosives, fuses and
incendiary and timing devices.” The Federal Bureau of
Investigation apprehended all Petitioners and learned their
objective was to destroy “war industries and war facilities in the
United States.” The President, by Executive Order, appointed a
Military Commission and directed it to try the Petitioners for
offenses against the law of war and the Articles of War. The
executive order also delineated regulations and procedures on
the trial and for review of the trial record and of any judgment
or sentence of the Commission. Also, the President, by
Proclamation, declared “that ‘all persons who are subjects,
citizens or residents of any nation at war with the United States
or who give obedience to or act under the direction of any such
nation, and who during time of war enter or attempt to enter the
United States through coastal or boundary defenses, and are
charged with committing or attempting or preparing to commit
sabotage, espionage, hostile or warlike acts, or violations of the
5. law of war, shall be subject to the law of war and to the
jurisdiction of military tribunals’.” In addressing the
President’s exercise of his war powers as commander in chief,
the Court stated that the exercise of those powers, including the
detention and trial of the Petitioners, will not be set aside “in a
time of war and of grave public danger” unless they are in clear
conflict with the Constitution.” The Court stated that “lawful
combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of
war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are
likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they
are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts
which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly
and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in
time of war, seeking to gather military information and
communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who
without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the
purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are
familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not
to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be
offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment
by military tribunals.”
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006). A Yemeni national detained at
Guantanamo Bay brought suit to challenge the legality and
constitutionality of the military tribunal before which he was to
be tried. Hamdan’s brief to the Supreme Court argued that
President Bush had “claimed the unilateral authority to try
suspected terrorists wholly outside the traditional civilian and
military judicial systems, for crimes defined by the President
alone, under procedures lacking basic protections, before judges
who are his chosen subordinates.” In Hamdan’s view, the
president’s actions “reach far beyond any war power ever
conferred upon the Executive, even during declared wars.”
Dividing 5-to-3 (Chief Justice Roberts not participating because
he had previously voted in the case at the court of appeals level)
the Court held that the Bush Administration’s plan to try
Guantanamo Bay detainees before military commissions was
6. unauthorized by statute and violated international law. The
overarching rationale of the Court’s decision is summed up by
Justice Stevens’ assertion that: “Even assuming that Hamdan is
a dangerous individual who would cause great harm or death to
innocent civilians given the opportunity, the executive
nevertheless must comply with the prevailing rule of law in
undertaking to try him and subject him to criminal punishment.”
The majority indicated that Congress could, through appropriate
legislation, provide for the use of military tribunals to try
Guantanamo Bay detainees.
In re Gault (1967). Gerald Francis Gault, a juvenile, was
arrested in 1964 while his mother and father were at work. The
police made no attempt to notify the juvenile’s parents that their
son had been taken into custody. During the course of trying to
find her son, Mrs. Gault was informed that Gerald had been
taken to the juvenile detention home. There, she was informed
that a legal hearing would take place in juvenile court the
following day. A petition for delinquency was filed with the
court the next day; however, the Gaults were never served with
a copy of the petition, which further failed to allege facts to
support an allegation of delinquency. Mrs. Gault, her eldest
son, and two probation officers appeared before the Judge in
chambers. The victim that claimed Gerald had made lewd
phone calls to her home was not present at the hearing. “No one
was sown in. No transcript was made. No memorandum or
record of the substance of the proceedings was prepared.”
Ultimately, the Judge sentenced Gerald to the State Industrial
School until the age of majority for allegedly making lewd
phone calls to a neighbor. No appeal was permitted under
Arizona state law. Gerald’s father filed a petition for a writ of
habeas corpus requesting the release of his son; however, the
state appellate courts denied the petition. The Supreme Court
held that due process requires that several basic rights under the
Constitution be afforded to juvenile offenders. First, adequate
written notice of the charges must be afforded with adequate
7. preparation time prior to court appearances. Second, the child
and his parents must be advised of their right to be represented
by counsel, and if they are unable to afford counsel, that
counsel will be appointed to represent the child. Third, the
constitutional privilege against self-incrimination is also
applicable in juvenile criminal cases. Fourth, juveniles are also
afforded the rights of confrontation and sworn testimony of
witnesses available for cross-examination.
Chapter 3
Chimel v. California (1969). Police officers obtained a warrant
for the Chimel’s arrest for allegedly committing various
burglaries. Law enforcement went to Chimel’s home to execute
the arrest warrant; however, he was not home. Chimel’s wife
allowed the police to wait until he returned. When Chimel
arrived, the police arrested him. The police asked for Chimel’s
consent to search the premises, but he refused. Although
Chimel denied their request, the police “conducted a search of
the entire house ‘on the basis of the lawful arrest’.” Items were
seized and subsequently used to convict Chimel of burglary
over his objection that the items were unconstitutionally seized.
The Supreme Court held the “warrantless search of petitioner’s
house cannot be constitutionally justified as incident to that
arrest.” The Court futher specified that “an arresting officer
may search the arrestee’s person to discover and remove
weapons and to seize evidence to prevent its concealment or
destruction, and may search the area ‘within the immediate
control’ of the person arrested, meaning the area from which he
might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. On
this basis, the Court held the serach unconstitutional under the
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000). In August 1998, the
City of Indianapolis began to a operate vehicle checkpoints in
an effort to interdict unlawful drugs. The overall ‘hit rate’ of
the program was approximately nine percent. The checkpoint
locations were predetermined weeks in advance based on area
8. crime statistics and traffic flow. The checkpoints were
conducted during daylight hours and were identified with
lighted signs reading, “NARCOTICS CHECKPOINT ___ MILE
AHEAD, NARCOTICS K-9 IN USE, BE PREPARED TO
STOP.” Respondent James Edmonds was stopped at a
checkpoint and later filed a motion for injunctive relief
claiming that the roadblocks violated the Fourth Amendment of
the Constitution. The US District Court denied the motion for
injunctive relief; however, the US Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit reversed, holding that the checkpoints
contravened the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court
affirmed holding the checkpoints in violation of the Fourth
Amendment because their primary purpose was
indistinguishable from general interest crime control. The
Court refused to validate suspicionless stops.
Ferguson v. City of Charleston (2000). In the fall of 1988, staff
members at the Charleston public hospital operated by the
Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) became
concerned about an apparent increase in the use of cocaine by
pregnant women. MUSC offered to cooperate with City
prosecutors when women delivered babies that tested postive for
illegal drugs at birth. A joint task force was created, which
developed “a policy which set forth procedures for identifying
and testing pregnant patients suspected of drug use; required
that a chain of custody be followed when obtaining and testing
patients’ urine samples; provided for education and treatment
referrals for patients testing positive; contained police
procedures and criteria for arresting patients who tested
positive; and prescribed prosecutions for drug offenses and/or
child neglect, depending on the stage of the defendant’s
pregnancy.” Women that were subsequently arrested under this
policy filed suit claiming that it violated their Fourth
Amendment rights on “the theory that warrantless and
nonconsensual drug tests conducted for criminal investigatory
purposes were unconstitutional searches.” The Supreme Court
9. agreed, holding that “a state hospital’s performance of a
diagnostic test to obtain evidence of a patient’s criminal
conduct for law enforcement purposes is an unreasonable search
if the patient has not consented to the procedure.”
Florida v. J.L.
(2000). An anonymous informant called the Miami-Dade Police
to report that “a young black male standing at a particular bus
stop and wearing a plaid shirt was carrying a gun.” Two police
officers responded to the call and went to the particular bus stop
mentioned by the anonymous informant. The officers saw
“three black males ‘just hanging out’.” J.L., a juvenile, was
wearing a plaid shirt. The officers did not see a firearm in plain
view and “apart from the tip, the officers had no reason to
suspect any of the three of illegal conduct.” The officers
approached J.L., “told him to put his hands up on the bus stop,
frisked him, and seized a gun” from his pocket. The other two
males were frisked, but nothing was found. While the trial
court held the search invalid, the intermediate appellate court
reversed holding the search within constitutional limits. The
Florida Supreme Court reversed holding that “anonymous tips
… are generally less reliable than tips from known informants
and can form the basis for reasonable suspicion only if
accompanied by specific indicia of reliability. The Supreme
Court affirmed. Justice Ginsburg, speaking for the Court, held
“the anonymous call concerning J. L. provided no predictive
information and therefore left the police without means to test
the informant’s knowledge or credibility. That the allegation
about the gun turned out to be correct does not suggest that the
officers, prior to the frisks, had a reasonable basis for
suspecting J. L. of engaging in unlawful conduct.” She went on
to stated that “the reasonableness of official suspicion must be
measured by what the officers knew before they conducted their
search.” Because the officers only had information from an
“unknown, unaccountable informant who neither explained how
he knew about the gun nor supplied any basis for believing he
had inside information about J. L., there was a lack of
10. reasonable suspicion to justify the search.
Hester v. United States (1924). The defendant was convicted of
“concealing distilled spirits; however, the judge admitted
testimony of witnesses over the defendant’s objections and he
appealed. The two witnesses at issue were revenue officers
who, based on information they obtained during an
investigation, went speak to the defendant. As the officers
approached the house, they saw the defendant hand “a quart
bottle” to another individual. The officers attempted to
apprehend both individuals, but they fled with jugs in hand.
The officer fired a single shot and the defendant halted,
throwing his jug away in the process. While the jug the
defendant was carrying broke, there was enough left for the
officers to determine it had contained whisky. The officer did
not have an arrest or search warrant, and as a result, the
defendant argued the evidence was inadmissible. The Supreme
Court affirmed the conviction holding that the evidence was
admissible because when evidence is abandoned, as when the
defendant dropped the jug, there is no seizure for Fourth
Amendment purposes.
Illinois v. Gates (1983). The police received an anonymous
letter that stated the Respondents, husband and wife, were
engaged in selling drugs. The letter claimed specific days and
times where the wife would drive their automoble to Florida “to
be loaded with drugs, and the husband would fly down” a few
days later “to drive the car back.” The letter claimed that car
“would be loaded with drugs, and that Respondents presently
had over $100,000 worth of drugs in their basement.” The
police acted on the tip, determined respondents’ address,
learned that the husband made a reservation to fly to Florida,
made arrangements for surveillance of the flight with an agent
of the Drug Enforcement Administration. The surveillance
revealed “that the husband took the flight, stayed overnight in a
motel room registered in the wife’s name, and left the following
morning with a woman in a car bearing an Illinois license plate
issued to the husband, heading north on an interstate highway
11. used by travelers to the Bloomingdale area. A search warrant
for respondents’ residence and automobile were obtained, which
lead to the discovery of marijuana and other contraband in
respondents’ car trunk and home. The trial judge orderd all the
items seized suppressed because “the letter and affidavit were
inadequate to sustain a determination of probable cause for
issuance of the search warrant under Aguilar v. Texas and
Spinelli v. United States since they failed to satisfy the ‘two-
pronged test’ of (1) revealing the informant’s ‘basis of
knowledge’ and (2) providing sufficient facts to establish either
the informant’s ‘veracity’ or the ‘reliability’ of the informant's
report. The Supreme Court abandoned the Aguliar-Spinelli test
for a “totality of the circumstances” test. Justice Rehnquist,
writing for the majority, stated that the Aguilar-Spinelli test
“should be understood simply as closley intertwined issues that
may usefully illuminate the common sense, practical question
whether there is ‘probable cause’ to believe that contraband or
evidence is located in a particular place.” The Court went on to
state that “the task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a
pratical, common sense decision whether, given all the
circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, there is a
fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be
found in a particular place.”
Katz v. United States (1967). In this landmark 1967 decision,
the Supreme Court overturned Olmstead v. United States
(1928). The Court reversed a conviction in which government
agents, acting without a warrant, attached a “bug,” or listening
device, to the outside of a public telephone booth from which
Charles Katz, a suspected bookie, often placed calls. Writing
for the Court, Justice Stewart stated that “the Fourth
Amendment protects people--not places.” According to Justice
Harlan’s concurrence, which has come to be regarded as the
most important opinion in Katz, the Fourth Amendment extends
to any place or any thing in which an individual has a
reasonable expectation of privacy.
12. Knowles v. Iowa (1998). An Iowa policeman stopped Knowles
for speeding and issued him a citation rather than arresting him.
The officer conducted a full search of his car, without either
Knowles’s consent or probable cause, and found marijuana and
other contraband. Knowles was arrested and prior to trial
moved to suppress the evidence on the grounds that since he had
not been arrested, the search could not be sustained under the
“search incident to arrest” exception recognized in United
States v. Robinson. The trial court denied the motion and found
Knowles guilty, based on state law giving officers authority to
conduct a full-blown search of an automobile and driver where
they issue a citation instead of making a custodial arrest.
Justice Rehnquist, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, held
that the serach violated the Fourth Amendment for two reasons.
First, “the threat to officer safety from issuing a traffic citation
is a good deal less than in the case of a custodial arrest. While
concern for safety during a routine traffic stop may justify the
‘minimal’ additional intrusion of ordering a driver and
passengers out of the car, it does not by itself justify the often
considerably greater intrusion attending a full fieldtype search.”
Additionally, Rehnquist asserted that “the need to discover and
preserve evidence does not exist in a traffic stop, for once
Knowles was stopped for speeding and issued a citation, all
evidence necessary to prosecute that offense had been
obtained.” The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and
remanded for further proceedings.
Kyllo v. United States (2001). Here the Court considered
whether the use of a “thermal imager” by law enforcement
agents constitutes a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth
Amendment. In this case, police had used the device without
first obtaining a warrant to scan a home they suspected to be
housing an indoor marijuana growing operation. Having
discerned the telltale infrared radiation associated with the use
of indoor growing lights, and having obtained corroborating
information, the police obtained a warrant to search the
premises, where they found more than 100 cannabis plants. The
13. procedure used by police in the Kyllo case has been in wide use
around the country as part of the national war on drugs. Police
and prosecutors typically take the view that the thermal scan is
not a search within the meaning of the 4th Amendment, since it
only collects data on heat that is being released into the public
space. In a close decision (5-4), the Supreme Court disagreed
with this perspective. Writing for the Court, Justice Scalia
opined that “[w]here, as here, the Government uses a device
that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home
that would previously have been unknowable without physical
intrusion, the surveillance is a search and is presumptively
unreasonable without a warrant.” In dissent, Justice Stevens
noted that “[a]ll that the infrared camera did … was passively
measure heat emitted from the exterior surfaces of petitioners
home; all that those measurements showed were relative
differences in emission levels, vaguely indicating that some
areas of the roof and outside walls were warmer than others.” In
Stevens’s view, the police did not significantly intrude on the
privacy of the occupants. The Kyllo case is interesting because
it shows how changing technology creates new and difficult
Fourth Amendment problems. As technology in this area
advances, courts will continue to confront such problems.
Mapp v. Ohio (1961). Cleveland, Ohio police arrived at Dollree
Mapp’s home pursuant to information that a bombing suspect
was hiding there. They demanded access, but failing to produce
a search warrant, were denied. Police returned some four hours
later and forced their way into the home. Mapp, who protested
the entry was forcibly detained while officers searched the
home. Although police failed to locate the bombing suspect,
they did find in a trunk in the basement some sexually explicit
materials. Mapp was arrested, tried and convicted under the
Ohio statute proscribing possession of obscene materials.
Dividing 7-2, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed her conviction,
holding that the evidence had been improperly admitted against
her since it had been obtained in violation of the Fourth
Amendment warrant requirement. In this landmark decision, the
14. Court overruled its precedent in Wolf v. Colorado (1949) and
applied the exclusionary rule to the state courts via the 14th
Amendment. Dissenting, Justice Harlan asserted that the Court
had “forgotten the sense of judicial restraint which, with due
regard for stare decisis, is one element that should enter into
deciding whether a past decision of this Court should be
overruled.” The majority, however, concluded that its decision
“gives to the individual no more than that which the
Constitution guarantees him, to the police officer no less than
that to which honest law enforcement is entitled, and, to the
courts, that judicial integrity so necessary in the true
administration of justice.”
Nix v. Williams (1984). The Respondent was arrested in
Davenport, Iowa for the disappearance of a 10-year-old girl in
Des Moines, Iowa. While the Respondent was being transported
to Des Moines, the police illegally interrogated him. During the
course of the “conversation,” the Respondent made
incriminating statements and directed the officers to the missing
child’s body. Prior to the beginning of the conversation
between the Respondent and the police, a “systematic search of
the area was being conducted with the aid of 200 volunteers.”
The search was terminated when the Respondent guided police
to the child’s body. The Respondent moved to suppress all
evidence at trial. The Supreme Court, speaking through Chief
Justice Burger, adopted the inevitable discovery exception to
the exclusionary rule. Under this exception, illegally obtained
evidence, such as the Respondent’s confession, may be deemed
admissible when the prosecution can establish that the
information sought would have been ultimately or inevitably
discovered by lawful means. The Court held that the “search
party ultimately or inevitably would have discovered the
victim’s body” because the evidence revealed that the
volunteers “were approaching the actual location of the body,
that the search would have been resumed had respondent not led
the police to the body, and that the body inevitably would have
15. been found.”
Olmstead v. United States (1928). Olmstead, a suspected
bootlegger, was charged with conspiracy to violate the National
Prohibition Act. The government’s evidence consisted of
transcripts of Olmstead’s telephone conversations obtained
through a wiretap placed outside his property. The agents had
obtained no warrant authorizing the wiretap. Although there was
no search or seizure of his person or physical property,
Olmstead maintained that the Fourth Amendment had been
violated. The term “effects,” as used in the Fourth Amendment,
could have been interpreted to include telephone conversations,
but the Court opted for a narrower construction. Writing for the
majority, Chief Justice Taft stated: “The reasonable view is that
one who installs in his house a telephone instrument with
connecting wires intends to project his voice to those quite
outside, and that the wires beyond his house, and messages
passing over them, are not within the protection of the Fourth
Amendment.” Justice Brandeis, along with three of his
colleagues, dissented. He asserted the need to keep the
Constitution relevant to changing technological conditions:
“The progress of science in furnishing the government with
means of espionage is not likely to stop with wire-tapping.
Ways may some day be developed by which the government,
without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce
them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a
jury the most intimate occurrences of the home.... Can it be that
the Constitution affords no protection against such invasions of
individual security?”
Rochin v. California (1952). Rochin was convicted for
possession of narcotics after the police had his stomach pumped
to retrieve capsules he had swallowed to avoid arrest. Having
granted cert, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed Rochin’s
conviction. Writing for the Court, Felix Frankfurter concluded
that the officers’ conduct in the case “shocked the conscience”
and was therefore invalid under the Due Process Clause of the
16. 14th Amendment. In concurring opinions, Justices Black and
Douglas objected to the broad due process approach and argued
that the case should be governed by the Self-Incrimination
Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which should be enforceable
against the state via the 14th Amendment. Arguing for “total
incorporation” of the Bill of Rights into the 14th Amendment,
Douglas wrote: “If it is a requirement of due process for a trial
in the federal courthouse, it is impossible for me to say that it is
not a requirement of due process for a trial in the state
courthouse.”
Smith v. Maryland (1979). At the request of law enforcement,
and without a warrant, a telephone company installed a pen
register at its central office to record the phone numbers dialed
from the telephone at Smith’s home. As a partial result of the
phone numbers obtained, Smith was indicted for robbery. At
trial, Smith moved to suppress the evidence on Fourth
Amendment grounds for the warrantless installation of the pen
register. The trial court denied the motion and the Maryland
Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court held “the
installation and use of the pen register was not a ‘search’ within
the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant
was required.” The Court went on to state that the “application
of the Fourth Amendment depends on whether the person
invoking its protection can claim a ‘legitimate expectation of
privacy’.” The Court held when Smith “voluntarily conveyed
numerical information to the phone company and ‘exposed’ that
information to its equipment in the normal course of business,
he assumed the risk that the company would reveal the
information.”
Terry v. Ohio (1968). A police officer on routine patrol
observed two men repeatedly walking up and down a street
while stopping to stare into a store window. Each time one of
the men walked up the street and stopped to look into the store
window and returned, a conference was held between the two
17. men and a third individual. The officer believed the men were
“casing a job, a stick up.” The officer approached the men,
“identified himself as a policeman, and asked their names;”
however, the men were less than forthcoming and mumbled
something under their breaths. The officeer “spun [Terry]
around, patted down his outside clothing, and found in his
overcoat pocket … a pistol.” The officer then removed the
overcoat from Terry, removed the pistol, and ordered the men
“to face the wall with their hands raised.” The officer repeated
the same procedure with the other two men, finding a pistol
during the patdown on one, but nothing on the other. Terry and
the second man with a pistol were charged with carrying a
conceaned weapon. The trial court denied defense’s motion to
supress the evidence “on the ground that the officer had cause
to believe the mem were acting suspiciously, their interrogation
was warranted, and the officer, for his own protection, had the
right to pat down their outer clothing having reasonable cause
to believe that they might be armed.” The Supreme Court held
the Fourth Amendment “protects people, not places” and applies
to citizens on the street as well as in their home. However, the
Court also held that the “exclusionary rule cannot properly be
invoked to exclude the products of legitimate and restrained
police investigative techniques.” The officer’s actions to detain
and patdown the men were held to be a seizure and serach under
the Fourth Amendment, but the serach and seziure were held
reasonable. The Court expressly held “where a reasonably
prudent officer is warranted in the circumstances of a given
case in believing that his safety or that of others is endangered,
he may make a reasonable search for weapons of the person
believed by him to be armed and dangerous.”
Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab (1989). The United
States Customs Service implemented a drug-screening program
requiring “urinalysis tests of Service employees seeking transfer
or promotion to positions having a direct involvement in drug
interdiction or requiring the individual to carry firearms or to
18. handle ‘classified’ material.” The Treasury Employees’s Union
filed a lawsuit on behalf of Custon Service employees seeking
relevant positions alleging that the drug testing program
violated the Fourth Amendment. The District Court agreed, and
enjoined the program. However, the Court of Appeals reversed,
vacating the injunction. While the Supreme Court held the
production of urine samples by employees for analysis is a
serach within the Fourth Amendment, the Court also held that
“a warrant is not required by the balance of privacy and
governmental interests in the context of this case.” Justice
Kennedy, speaking for the majority, stated that a warrant
requirement “would serve only to divert valuable agency
resources from the Service’s primary mission, which would be
compromised if warrants were necessary in connection with
routine, yet sensitive, employment decisions.” Kennedy went
on to state that “a warrant would provide little or no additional
protection of personal privacy, since the Service’s program
defines narrowly and specifically the circumstances justifying
testing and the permissible limits of such intrusions.”
Additionally, the “affected employees know that they must be
tested, are aware of the testing procedures that the Service must
follow, and are not subject to the discretion of officials in the
field.” Lastly the Court noted that “there are no special facts
for a neutral magistrate to evaluate, in that implementation of
the testing process becomes automatic when an employee
pursues a covered position.” As a result, the drug testing of
Service employees that apply for “promotion to positions
direclty involving the interdiction of illegal drugs, or to
positions that require the incumbent to carry firearms, is
reasonable despite the absence of a requirement of probable
cause or of some level of individualized suspicion.”
United States v. Calandra (1974). Calandra’s place of business
was searched pursuant to a warrant for the specific purpose of
seizing bookmaking records and wagering paraphernalia for a
gambling investigation. During the course of the search, an
agent, knowledgeable of a pending investigation regarding
19. loanskarking activities, discovered and seized a loansharking
record. As a result, a grand jury was convened to investigate
loanskarking, which subpoenaed Calandra to appear before it
for the purposes of questioning him on the seized evidence.
Calandra refused to testify on Fifth Amendment grounds against
self-incrimination. Calandra then moved to suppress the
loansharking evidence seized during the search of his office on
the grounds that the affidavit supporting the warrant was
insufficient and that the search exceeded the scope of the
warrant. The trial court granted the motion and futher ordered
that Calandra did not have to answer any questions posed by the
grand jury related to the loanskarking evidence. However, the
Supreme Court held that “a witness summoned to appear and
testify before a grand jury may not refuse to answer questions
on the ground that they are based on evidence obtained from an
unlawful search and seizure.” The Court, speaking through
Justice Powell, reinforced the notion that the exclusionary rule
is a “judicially created remedy designed to safeguard Fourth
Amendment rights generally through its deterrent effect on
future unlawful police conduct, rather than a personal
constitutional right of the party aggrieved.” As a result of this
purpose, the Court held that “allowing a grand jury witness to
invoke the exclusionary rule would unduly interfere with the
effective and expeditious discharge of the grand jury’s duties,
and extending the rule to grand jury proceedings would achieve
only a speculative and minimal advance in deterring police
misconduct at the expense of substantially impeding the grand
jury’s role.” As a result, the exclusionary rule does not apply in
grand jury proceedings.
United States v. Fregoso (1995). The Nebraska Police
Department obtained information that Dixie Buck and Peter
Lopez were engaged in elicit drug activities. As a result,
officers obtained a warrant to install pen registers on their
respective phone lines. The state court also authorized the
telephone company to “supply subscriber information and caller
identification service for the phones to which the pen registers
20. were attached.” The police were also authorized to “to intercept
conversations over Buck’s and Lopez’s home telephones.” As a
result of the investigation, police officers obtained search
warrants for the homes of Buck, the Fregosos, Soria, and
Brown. In conducting the search of the Fregosos’ residence, the
police saw David Fregoso “drop a towel and plastic baggie from
his hand,” which was later determined to be cocaine. Eleven
defendants, including the Fregosos, Soria and Brown were
indicted and convicted of conspiracy to distribute and possess
with intent to distribute cocaine and possession of cocaine in
furtherance of the conspiracy … based upon the quantity of
cocaine David Fregoso dropped on the day the search warrants
were executed.” In upholding the use of the pen registers and
caller identification service, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
discussed the federal statute pertaining to trap and trace
devices. 18 U.S.C. § 3127(4) defines a trap and trace device as
“a device which captures the incoming electronic or other
impulses which identify the originating number of an instrument
or device from which a wire or electronic communication was
transmitted.” The court refused to hold the caller identification
service as a wiretap and instead held that the service was a trap
and trace device as it “decode[s] the electronic impulses the
telephone is receiving and display[s] them as a telephone
number at the same time that the telephone is receiving the
ringing impulses.” The procedural component of the federal
statute requires a magistrate approving the use of trap and trace
devices to “enter and ex parte order authorizing the installation”
of the device “upon proper application” by law enforcement.
The Fregosos failed to present any evidence that the procedures
delineated in the statute were not properly followed, and as a
result, the Eighth Circuit upheld the use of the caller
identification service.
United States v. Leon (1984). Police officers obtained a search
warrant acting on a tip from a confidential informant of
unproven reliability. A subsequent search of a residence turned
up a substantial amount of illegal drugs. At an evidentiary
21. hearing prior to trial, a judge ruled that the warrant had been
wrongly issued; that there was insufficient information to
constitute probable cause. The Supreme Court ultimately held
that the evidence could nevertheless be admitted against the
defendants, because to exclude such evidence would have no
deterrent effect on police misconduct. The error was made by
the magistrate who issued the warrant, not by the police who
were deemed to be acting in good faith. Dissenting, Justice
Brennan asserted that “it is clear that we have not been treated
to an honest assessment of the merits of the exclusionary rule
but have instead been drawn into a curious world where the
‘costs’ of excluding illegally obtained evidence loom to
exaggerated heights and where the ‘benefits’ of such exclusion
are made to disappear with a mere wave of the hand.”
United States v. Ross (1982). District of Columbia Police
responded to a tip provided by an informant that Ross was
selling narcotics from his car. The informant provided the
location of the vehicle and the police immediately drove to
where Ross’s vehicle was allegedly located. When Ross entered
the vehicle and began to drive, the police stopped the vehicle
and made an arrest. The police opened the “trunk, found a
closed brown paper bag, and after opening the bag, discovered
glassine bags containing white powder,” which later tested
positive for heroin. The vehicle was driven to police
headquarters where a second warantless search was performed,
which “revealed a zippered leather pouch containing cash.” As
a result of the two searches, Ross was tried and convicted of
possession of heroin with intent to distribute, his objection to
the admission of the seized evidence notwithstanding. The
Supreme Court held where police officiers have “legitimately
stopped an automobile and have probable cause to believe that
contraband is concealed somewhere within it may conduct a
warrantless search of the vehicle that is as thorough as a
magistrate could authorize by warrant.” The Court applied the
“automobile exception” articulated in Carroll v. United States to
22. searches “of vehicles that are supported by probable cause to
believe that the vehicle contains contraband.” As a result, the
serach was not unreasonable as it was based on “objective facts
that would justify the issuance of a warrant,” even though a
warrant was not actually obtained.
United States v. Sokolow (1989). WhenDrug Enforcement
Agents stopped Sokolow at the Honolulu International Airport,
agents found 1,063 grams of cocaine in his carry-on luggage.
Prior to apprehending Sokolow, agents discovered during the
course of an ininvesigation that he paid cash for two round-trip
plane tickes, traveled under a name that did not match the name
under which his telephone number was listed, travelled to
Miami, a city kknown for illicit drugs, stayed in Miami for only
48 hours when a trip from Hawaii takes 20 hours, appeared
nervous during the flight, and failed to check any luggage.
Sokolow was subsequently indicted for possession with intent to
distribute cocaine. Sokolow moved to suppress the evidence;
however, the trial court denied the motion on the grounds that
the stop was justified by a reasonable suspicion that he was
engaged in criminal activity, as required by the Fourth
Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed that there was
sufficient reasonable suspicion to believe Sokolow was
transporting illegal drugs when they detained him; thus, the stop
was justified under the premise of Terry v. Ohio. The
reasonableness of the stop does not turn on whether the police
used the least restrictive means, but rather whether the stop was
reasonable under the circumstances.
United States v. United States District Court (1972). Three
defendants were charged with conspiracy to destroy government
property. One of them, Plamondon, was also charged with the
bombing of a CIA office in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Defendants
filed a pretrial motion to compel disclosure of information the
government had obtained through electronic surveillance that
had not been judicially approved. The government asserted that
23. the surveillance was lawful as a reasonable exercise of the
president’s power to protect national security. The U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Michigan held that the
government’s surveillance violated the Fourth Amendment
prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit agreed. The
Supreme Court held that these activities offended the Fourth
Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and
seizures.
Whren v. United States (1996). Police were traveling in an
unmarked police vehicle through a “high drug area” when they
observed a truck waiting at a stop sign for an unusually long
time. After some time, “the truck turned without signaling and
sped off at an ‘unreasonable’ speed.” The officers stopped the
truck with the intention of giving the driver a warning;
however, when they approached the truck, they saw “plastic
bags of crack cocaine in Whren’s hands and arrested him.
Whren moved to suppress the drugs on the grounds that the
officers did not have “reasonable suspicion or probable cause to
believe” Whren was “engaged in illegal drug-dealing activity,
and that the officers’ traffic-violation ground for stopping the
truck was pretextual.” The trial court denied the motion to
suppress. The Supreme Court held that the “temporary
detention of a motorist upon probable cause to believe that he
has violated the traffic laws does not violate the Fourth
Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if
a reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist absent
some additional law enforcement objective.” As long as the
officer has probable cause to believe a traffic law has been
violated, the detention of the motorist is reasonable.
Furthermore, the Court held that “ulterior motives” will not
invalidate police conduct on their own because “subjective
intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth
Amendment analysis.”
Wilson v. Arkansas (1995). In executing a search warrant of
24. Wilson’s home, the police failed to “knock and announce” their
presence and authority as they entered the home. As a result of
the police violating this common law “knock and announce”
principle, Wilson moved to suppress the evidence seized during
the search. The trial court denied the motion, and the Arkansas
Supreme Court affirmed holding that the “knock and announce”
rule is not required under the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme
Court held however that the “ ‘knock and announce principle’
forms a part of the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry.”
The Court stated that in some circumstances, failure to knock
and announce while entering a home could be unreasonable
under the Fourth Amendment. The Court suggested that when
there is a “threat of physical harm to police,” or “reason to
believe that evidence would likely be destroyed if advance
notice were given,” failure to knock and announce could be
reasonable. Additionally, when the police are pursuing a
fugitive from justice, it could be reasonable to fail to comply
with the common law knock and announce principle. The Court
ultimately left it to the lower courts to “determine such relevant
countervailing factors.” The police asserted in this case that
they “would have been placed in peril” and would have
increased the likelihood that narcotics would have been
destroyed had they complied with the rule. The Supreme Court
remanded the case to the trial court to make a determination of
the reasonableness of the conduct.
Chapter 4
Arizona v. Fulminante (1991). Fulminante’s 11-year-old
daughter was murdered in Arizona. After the murder, he left
Arizona for New York, where he was convicted of an unrelated
crime and sentenced to prison. While in prison, Fulminate
became friends with a fellow inmate named Anthony Sarivola,
who was a paid informant for the Federal Bureau of
Investigation. In the course of conversation, Sarivola told
Fulminante that the reason for the harsh treatment by other
inmates was a rumor circulating that he had murdered a child.
25. Sarivola told him that he would provide protection in exchange
for the truth. Fulminante disclosed that he had killed his
daughter in Arizona and gave details about the crime. After
being released from prison in New York, Fulminante was
indicted for first-degree murder in Arizona. The confession to
Sarivola was the key piece of evidence, and Fulminate sought to
have it suppressed. The trial court rejected the notion that the
confession was coerced and barred by the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed holding
that “the confession was coerced” and ordered a new trial
without the use of the confession. The Supreme Court affirmed
holding the confession was coerced because Fulminante’s
primary motivation to confess was to prevent physical violence.
Thus, the confession could not be used against him under the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Chimel v. California (1969). Police officers obtained a warrant
for the Chimel’s arrest for allegedly committing various
burglaries. Law enforcement went to Chimel’s home to execute
the arrest warrant; however, he was not home. Chimel’s wife
allowed the police to wait until he returned. When Chimel
arrived, the police arrested him. The police asked for Chimel’s
consent to search the premises, but he refused. Although
Chimel denied their request, the police “conducted a search of
the entire house ‘on the basis of the lawful arrest’.” Items were
seized and subsequently used to convict Chimel of burglary
over his objection that the items were unconstitutionally seized.
The Supreme Court held the “warrantless search of petitioner’s
house cannot be constitutionally justified as incident to that
arrest.” The Court futher specified that “an arresting officer
may search the arrestee’s person to discover and remove
weapons and to seize evidence to prevent its concealment or
destruction, and may search the area ‘within the immediate
control’ of the person arrested, meaning the area from which he
might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence. On
this basis, the Court held the serach unconstitutional under the
26. Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond (2000). In August 1998, the
City of Indianapolis began to a operate vehicle checkpoints in
an effort to interdict unlawful drugs. The overall ‘hit rate’ of
the program was approximately nine percent. The checkpoint
locations were predetermined weeks in advance based on area
crime statistics and traffic flow. The checkpoints were
conducted during daylight hours and were identified with
lighted signs reading, “NARCOTICS CHECKPOINT ___ MILE
AHEAD, NARCOTICS K-9 IN USE, BE PREPARED TO
STOP.” Respondent James Edmonds was stopped at a
checkpoint and later filed a motion for injunctive relief
claiming that the roadblocks violated the Fourth Amendment of
the Constitution. The US District Court denied the motion for
injunctive relief; however, the US Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit reversed, holding that the checkpoints
contravened the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court Court
affirmed holding the checkpoints in violation of the Fourth
Amendment because their primary purpose was
indistinguishable from general interest crime control. The
Court refused to validate suspicionless stops.
Koon v. United States(1996). In the wake of the Rodney King
beating, the police officers involved were acquitted on state
charges of assault and excessive use of force, but were
convicted in federal court for violating King’s “constitutional
rights under color of law.” Under the federal Sentencing
Guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing, each defendant
was eligible for a sentence ranging from 70 to 87 months;
however, the judge sentenced them “two downward departures
from that range” based on King’s misconduct. Additionally the
judge based the departure on four factors, including “the
petitioners were unusually susceptible to abuse in prison, they
would lose their jobs and be precluded from employment in law
enforcement, they had been subject to successive state and
federal prosecutions, and that they posed a low risk of
recidivism.” The sentencing range after the departures was 30
27. to 37 months, and the court sentenced each
to 30 months. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected each
departure cited by the District Court. The Supreme Court held
that the federal Sentencing Guidelines do not remove judicial
discretion in a sentencing determination, but rather “allows a
departure from the range if the court finds ‘there exists an
aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, to a degree,
not adequately taken into consideration’ by the Sentencing
Commission in formulating the Guidelines.” The Court held the
District Court did not abuse its discretion in considering “the
susceptibility to abuse in prison and the burdens of successive
prosecutions.” However, the Court also found that the District
Court did abuse its discretion in relying on “collateral
employment consequences” and “the low likelihood of
recidivism” as support for its departure.
Miller v. Clark County (2003). A Clark County Sheriff’s
Deputy was on routine patrol when he became suspicious of the
driver of a silver Pontiac Fiero. The deputy conducted a
“computerized check” and discovered that the vehicle displayed
a license plate belonging to a different vehicle, and as a result,
attempted to stop the vehicle. Miller, the driver of the vehicle,
refused and gave chase. At one point in the chase, the
passenger exited the vehicle and the Deputy pursued. The
driver entered a driveway and was pursued by another officer
traveling with his police dog “Kimon.” Once the officer and the
police dog reached the vehicle, Miller was no longer in the
vehicle and traveling on foot. After unsuccessfully searching
for Miller, the Deputy yelled out, “This is the Sheriff’s Office.
You have five seconds to make yourself known, or a police dog
will be sent to find you.” Miller gave no response. The Deputy
let “Kimon” off his leash and “gave a command that directed
the dog to search for [Miller] and detain him by biting his arm
or leg.” Approximately one minute later, Miller was heard
screaming in the nearby woods. It took sixty seconds for the
Deputy to find Miller and saw “Kimon
28. biting his upper arm. The Deputy gave the command for
“Kimon” to release Miller, who complied immediately. Miller
was then transported to the hospital for treatment. Miller
alleged the “deputy’s use of the police dog constituted
excessive force in violation of his Fourth Amendment right to
be free from unreasonable seizures. The Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals held that the of the police dog to “bite and hold”
Miller’s arm for up to one minute did not constitute the use of
deadly force nor did it “constitute excessive force in violation
of the Fourth Amendment.”
Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993). Police officers observed
Dickerson leaving a building known for selling and trafficking
cocaine. When the officers approached Dickerson, he seemed to
make “evasive actions.” Therefore, the police decided to
investigate further and told Dickerson to submit to a “patdown”
Terry search. The search resulting in finding no weapons, but
the officer “felt a small lump felt a small lump” in Dickerson’s
pocket, “believed it to be a lump of crack cocaine upon
examining it with his fingers.” The officer “then reached into
the pocket and retrieved a small bag of cocaine.” Dickerson
moved to suppress the evidence at his trial for possession of a
controlled substance, but the trial court denied the motion. The
Supreme Court reversed the trial court stating that the “police
may seize nonthreatening contraband detected through the sense
of touch during a protective patdown search of the sort
permitted by Terry, so long as the search stays within the
bounds marked by Terry.” The Court refused to accept a “plain
feel exception” to Terry. According to the Supreme Court,
Terry “permits a brief stop of a person whose suspicious
conduct leads an officer to conclude in light of his experience
that criminal activity may be afoot, and a patdown search of the
person for weapons when the officer is justified in believing
that the person may be armed and
presently dangerous.” This is a “protective search” that is “not
29. meant to discover evidence of crime, [and] must be strictly
limited to that which is necessary for the discovery of weapons
which might be used to harm the officer or others.” The
Supreme Court explicitly held that if “the protective search goes
beyond what is necessary to determine if the suspect is armed, it
is no longer valid under Terry and its fruits will be suppressed.”
Miranda v. Arizona (1966). Police arrested Ernesto Miranda, a
23 year-old indigent with a ninth grade education, and charged
him with raping an 18 year-old girl. At the police station, the
victim picked Miranda out of a “lineup.” Two officers then took
Miranda to a room where they interrogated him. After first
denying his guilt, Miranda eventually confessed to the crime.
Following his conviction, Miranda appealed on the ground that
his confession had been coerced. The Supreme Court granted
review, consolidating Miranda’s appeal with three other cases
involving the admissibility of confessions. The Court reversed
Miranda’s conviction, holding that his confession had been
improperly admitted into evidence. Per Chief Justice Warren,
the Court held that, henceforth, police must advise suspects of
their right to remain silent and their right to have counsel
present during interrogation. Failure to provide these warnings
will result in the suppression of a confession, even if it is
deemed reliable. These new requirements were based on the
Court’s conclusion that “without proper safeguards the process
of in-custody interrogation ... contains inherently compelling
pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to
resist and to compel him to speak where he would not otherwise
do so freely.” In a bitter dissent, Justice White complained that
“[i]n some unknown number of cases the Court’s rule will
return a killer, a rapist or other criminal to the streets ... to
repeat his crime whenever it pleases him.”
New York v. Quarles (1984). Two New York City police
officers were approached by a woman who claimed she had just
been raped and that her assailant had gone into a nearby grocery
store. The police were informed that the assailant was carrying
30. a gun. The officers proceeded to the store and immediately
spotted Benjamin Quarles, who matched the description given
by the victim. Upon seeing the police, Quarles turned and ran.
One of the police officers drew his service revolver and ordered
Quarles to “freeze.” Quarles complied with the officer’s
request. The officer frisked Quarles and discovered an empty
shoulder holster. Before reading Quarles the Miranda warnings,
the officer asked where the gun was. Quarles nodded in the
direction of some empty boxes and said, “The gun is over
there.” He was then placed under arrest and “Mirandized.”
Later Quarles moved to have his statement suppressed from
evidence since it was made prior to the Miranda warnings. He
also moved for suppression of the gun under the fruit of the
poisonous tree doctrine. The Supreme Court allowed both
pieces of evidence to be used against Quarles, notwithstanding
the delay in the Miranda warnings. Obviously, the Court felt
that the officers were justified in locating a discarded weapon
prior to Mirandizing Quarles. In so holding, the Court created
the public safety exception.
Nix v. Williams (1984). The Respondent was arrested in
Davenport, Iowa for the disappearance of a 10-year-old girl in
Des Moines, Iowa. While the Respondent was being transported
to Des Moines, the police illegally interrogated him. During the
course of the “conversation,” the Respondent made
incriminating statements and directed the officers to the missing
child’s body. Prior to the beginning of the conversation
between the Respondent and the police officers, a “systematic
search of the area was being conducted with the aid of 200
volunteers.” The search was terminated when the Respondent
guided police to the child’s body. The Respondent moved to
suppress all evidence at trial. The Supreme Court, speaking
through Chief Justice Burger, adopted the inevitable discovery
exception to the exclusionary rule. Under this exception,
illegally obtained evidence, such as the Respondent’s
confession, may be deemed admissible when the prosecution
can establish that the information sought would have been
31. ultimately or inevitably discovered by lawful means. The Court
held that the “search party ultimately or inevitably would have
discovered the victim’s body” because the evidence revealed
that the volunteers “were approaching the actual location of the
body, that the search would have been resumed had respondent
not led the police to the body, and that the body inevitably
would have been found.”
Reid v. Georgia (1980). Two men were observed by federal
narcotic agents at the Atlanta Airport “occasionally” looking to
each other while in line to board a commercial flight early in
the morning hours. Both men were charring a “shoulder bag,”
but neither had any other luggage. As the two men left the
terminal, the agents asked both for identification. The two
consented to a search of their person and should bags; however,
Reid attempted to flee. Before Reid was apprehended, his
abandoned bag was serached and cocaine was found therein.
Reid successfully moved to supress the evidence at trial;
however, the Georgia Court of Appeals reversed, “holding that
the stop … was permissible, since he appeared to the agent to fit
the so-called ‘drug courier profile’.” The Supreme Court, in its
per curiam opinion, held “the agent could not, as a matter of
law, have reasonably suspected [Reid] of criminal activity on
the basis of the observed circumstances.” The Supreme Court
stated “the fact that the agent believed [Reid] and his
companion were attempting to conceal the fact that they were
traveling together is too slender a reed to support the seizure.”
The conviction for possession of a controlled substance was
vacated and the case remanded to the lower court.
Rhode Island v. Innis (1980). A taxicab driver who was robbed
“by a man wielding a sawed-off shotgun,” identified Innis as the
guilty party. A police officer on patrol saw Innis, “arrested
him, and advised him of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona.”
Other officers arrived at the arrest sence, who also advised Innis
“of his Miranda rights.” Innis told the officers “he understood
his rights and wanted to speak with a lawyer.” Innis was
transported to the police station with three officers that “were
32. instructed not to question [him] or intimidate him in any way.”
However, during the commute, “two of the officers engaged in a
conversation between themselves concerning the missing
shotgun. One of the officers stated that there were ‘a lot of
hanicapped children running around in the area’ because a
school for such children was located nearby, and ‘God forbid
one of them might find a weapon with shells and they might
hurt themselves’.” Innis immediately interrupted the
conversation, “stating that the officers should turn the car
around so he could show them where the gun was located.”
Once the officers returned to the arrest sence, Innis was advised
of his Miranda rights for a third time. Innis stated he
“understood those rights, but that he ‘wanted to get the gun out
of the way because of the kids in the area in the school’.” Innis
then led the police to the shotgun. The Supreme Court,
speaking through Justice Stewart, held Innis “was not
‘interrogated’ in violation of his rights under Miranda to remain
silent until he had consulted with a lawyer.” The Court stated
“there was no express questioning of [Innis]; the conversation
between the two officers was, at least in form, nothing more
than a dialogue between them to which no response from
respondent was invited.” The Court went on to state that Innis
was “was not subjected to the ‘functional equivalent’ of
questioning, since it cannot be said that the officers should have
known that their conversation was reasonably likely to elicit an
incriminating response.” Although Justice Stewart conceded
Innis was subjected to “subtle compulsion,” Stewart also noted
that “it must be established that a suspect’s incriminating
response was the product of words or actions on the part of the
police that they should have known were reasonably likely to
elicit an incriminating response, which was not established
here.”
Rochin v. California (1952). Rochin was convicted for
possession of narcotics after the police had his stomach pumped
to retrieve capsules he had swallowed to avoid arrest. Having
granted cert, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed Rochin’s
33. conviction. Writing for the Court, Felix Frankfurter concluded
that the officers’ conduct in the case “shocked the conscience”
and was therefore invalid under the Due Process Clause of the
14th Amendment. In concurring opinions, Justices Black and
Douglas objected to the broad due process approach and argued
that the case should be governed by the Self-Incrimination
Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which should be enforceable
against the state via the 14th Amendment. Arguing for “total
incorporation” of the Bill of Rights into the 14th Amendment,
Douglas wrote: “If it is a requirement of due process for a trial
in the federal courthouse, it is impossible for me to say that it is
not a requirement of due process for a trial in the state
courthouse.”
Tennessee v. Garner(1985). At the time this case reached the
Supreme Court, a Tennessee Statute provided that “if, after a
police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal
suspect, and the suspect flees or forcibly resists, ‘the officer
may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest’.” A
Memphis police officer, acting under this statute, shot and
killed the repondent’s son. Garner’s son was “told to halt” by
the officer, but instead he “fled over a fence at night in the
backyard of a house he was suspected of burglarizing.” The
officer “used deadly force despite being ‘reasonably sure’ the
suspect was unarmed, 17 or 18 years old, and of slight build”
As a result, the father filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
violating his son’s constitutional rights. The District Court held
that the statute and the officer’s actions were constitutional;
however, the Court of Appeals reversed. The Supreme Court,
speaking through Justice White, held the Tennessee statute
unconstitutional “insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force
against … an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing
suspect.” Under these circumstances, “force may not be used
unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has
probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant
threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or
others.
34. United States v. Arvizu (2002). Arvizu “was stopped by Border
Patrol Agent Stoddard while driving on an unpaved road in a
remote area of southeastern Arizona” believed to be a path
traveled by drug smugglers. The agent searched his vehicle and
found “more than 100 pounds of marijuana.” Arvizu was
arrested and charged with possession with intent to distribute.
Agent Stoddard believed, based on his training as a board agent,
that Arvizu was transporting marijuana into the United States.
Chief Justice Rehnquist writing for the Court, held under “the
totality of the circumstances and giving due weight to …
inferences drawn by Stoddard, … [there was] reasonable
suspicion to believe that [Arvizu] was engaged in illegal
activity.” Rehnquist went on to say that “because the ‘balance
between the public interest and the individual’s right to
personal security,’ tilts in favor of a standard less than probable
cause in brief investigatory stops of persons or vehicles, the
Fourth Amendment is satisfied if the officer’s action is
supported by reasonable suspicion to believe that criminal
activity ‘may be afoot’.” Rehnquist gave lower courts direction
in determining whether there is reasonable suspicion by
instructing courts to look at the “totality of the circumstances”
to decide whether the officer has a “particularized and objective
basis” for suspecting criminal activity.
United States v. Wade (1967). Wade was indicted for
conspiracy and bank robbery. Several weeks afterwards, police
placed Wade in a “lineup in which each person wore strips of
tape on his face, as the robber allegedly had done, and, on
direction, repeated words like those the robber allegedly had
used.” This was done without notice to Wade’s appointed
counsel. As a reuslt of the lineup, two bank employees
identified Wade as the robber. At Wade’s trial, the employees
identified Wade as the robber when asked whether the guilty
person was in the courtroom. However, Wade’s attorney arged
that the lineup “violated [Wade’s] Fifth Amendment privilege
against self-incrimination and his Sixth Amendment right to
counsel, and filed a motion for judgment of acquittal or,
35. alternatively, to strike the courtroom identifications.” The trial
court denied the motions, and Wade was convicted. The
Supreme Court held “neither the lineup itself nor anything
required therein violated [Wade’s] Fifth Amendment privilege
against self-incrimination, since merely exhibiting his person
for observation by witnesses and using his voice as an
identifying physical characteristic involved no compulsion of
the accused to give evidence of a testimonial nature against
himself which is prohibited by that Amendment. However, the
Court held the post-indictment lineup without the presence of
his attroney, violated Wade’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel
because such a right “guarantees an accused the right to counsel
not only at his trial but at any critical confrontation by the
prosecution at pretrial proceedings where the results might
determine his fate and where the absence of counsel might
derogate from his right to a fair trial.” The post-indictment
lineup was held to be a “critical prosecutive stage,” and
therefore Wade was entitled to have counsel present.
Whren v. United States (1996). Police were traveling in an
unmarked police vehicle through a “high drug area” when they
observed a truck waiting at a stop sign for an unusually long
time. After some time, “the truck turned without signaling and
sped off at an ‘unreasonable’ speed.” The officers stopped the
truck with the intention of giving the driver a warning;
however, when they approached the truck, they saw “plastic
bags of crack cocaine in Whren’s hands and arrested him.
Whren moved to suppress the drugs on the grounds that the
officers did not have “reasonable suspicion or probable cause to
believe” Whren was “engaged in illegal drug-dealing activity,
and that the officers’ traffic-violation ground for stopping the
truck was pretextual.” The trial court denied the motion to
suppress. The Supreme Court held that the “temporary
detention of a motorist upon probable cause to believe that he
has violated the traffic laws does not violate the Fourth
Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable seizures, even if
a reasonable officer would not have stopped the motorist absent
36. some additional law enforcement objective.” As long as the
officer has probable cause to believe a traffic law has been
violated, the detention of the motorist is reasonable.
Furthermore, the Court held that “ulterior motives” will not
invalidate police conduct on their own because “subjective
intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth
Amendment analysis.”
Chapter 5
Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978). Here the Supreme Court held
that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment “is
not violated when.a state prosecutor carries out a threat made
during plea negotiations to have the accused reindicted on more
serious charges on which he is plainly subject to prosecution if
he does not plead guilty to the offense with which he was
originally charged.” Justice Stewart, writing for the majority,
stated that the “the guilty plea and the often concomitant plea
bargain are important components of this country’s criminal
justice system; properly administered, they can benefit all
concerned.” Stewart went on to say “though to punish a person
because he has done what the law allows violates due process,
there is no such element of punishment in the ‘give-and-take’ of
plea bargaining as long as the accused is free to accept or reject
the prosecutor’s offer.Bruton v. United States(1968).Burton and
his co-defendant, Evans, were tried jointly and convicted for
armed postal robbery. While Evans did not testify, a postal
inspector testified that Evans confessed that he and Burton
committed the robbery. As a result of the testimony, “the trial
judge instructed the jury that, although Evans’s confession was
evidence against him it was inadmissible hearsay against
[Burton] and had to be disregarded in determining [Burton’s]
guilt or innocence.” The Court of Appeals affirmed Burton’s
conviction in view of the trial judge’s jury instructions. The
Supreme Court held that due to “the substantial risk that the
jury, despite instructions to the contrary, looked to the
incriminating statements in determining [Burton’s] guilt, the
37. admission of Evans’s confession in the joint trial violated his
right of cross-examination secured by the Confrontation Clause
of the Sixth Amendment.” Burton’s conviction was reversed and
the case remanded for a new trial.
Cook v. State (1977). Cook and three codefendants were jointly
tried and convicted for conspiracy to commit sexual battery and
sexual battery. Each defendant argued on appeal that they were
denied their Sixth Amendment right to confront their accusers
when incriminating statements of three of the codefendants were
introduced” when none of the defendant’s testified at trial. In
response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Burton, Florida
promulgated Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.152, which gives the
State of Florida three options “when the trial court determines
that a defendant’s statement is not admissible against a
codefendant.” The State can choose to 1) severe the trials of
the defendants, 2) try the defendants jointly without admitting
the incriminating statement into evidence, or 3) try the
defendants jointly, admit the incriminating statements into
evidence, but remove the references to the defendant in which
the statements are inadmissible. The State proceeded under
option two; however, the Court examined whether a defendant
could nonetheless be prejudiced even though the references to
him are deleted from the incriminating statements of a
codefendant. The Court, speaking through Judge Scheb,
adopted the following standard: “if the jury was ‘highly likely’
to determine from a co-defendant’s statement that the defendant
was the nameless individual incriminated by the statement, a
Bruton violation has occurred, even if the inference drawn from
the codefendant’s statement is incriminating only when
considered in light of other evidence offered at trial.”
However, because of the overwhelming evidence against Cook,
even if there was a Burton violation, the Court held it was
harmless error.
Duncan v. Louisiana(1968). Here the Supreme Court made the
right of trial by jury applicable to defendants in state criminal
38. cases. In a concurring opinion joined by Justice Douglas,
Justice Black expressed his satisfaction with what the Court had
done under the mantle of selective incorporation: “I believe as
strongly as ever that the Fourteenth Amendment intended to
make the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. I have been
willing to support the selective incorporation doctrine, however,
as an alternative, although perhaps less historically supportable
than complete incorporation. ... [T]he selective incorporation
process has the virtue of having already worked to make most of
the Bill of Rights protections applicable to the States.”
Gideon v. Wainwright(1963). Clarence Earl Gideon, a 51 year-
old indigent “drifter” who had been in and out of jails all his
adult life, was charged with felonious breaking and entering. At
trial, he requested that the court appoint an attorney to represent
him. The court refused, citing the Florida law that required
appointment of counsel for indigent defendants only in capital
cases. While serving his sentence in the Florida State Prison,
Gideon unsuccessfully challenged his conviction in the Florida
Supreme Court on a writ of habeas corpus. He then obtained
review by the U.S. Supreme Court on a writ of certiorari. In a
unanimous decision, the Court reversed Gideon’s conviction.
Writing for the Court, Hugo Black opined that “[t]he right of
one charged with a crime to counsel may not be deemed
fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it
is in ours.” Gideon v. Wainwright overruled the Supreme
Court’s 1942 holding in Betts v. Brady. Because Gideon was
made retroactive, it allowed numerous persons serving time in
state prisons to win their freedom by seeking writ of habeas
corpus in the state and federal courts. Without question, Gideon
was one of the most important decisions of the Warren Court in
the field of criminal justice.
Hurtado v. California (1884). In this case the Supreme Court
rejected the argument that the grand jury procedure required in
federal criminal cases by the Fifth Amendment was an essential
feature of “due process of law” and thus required in state
39. criminal cases by the Fourteenth Amendment. Today, the
Hurtado decision remains “good” law; states are not required by
the federal constitution to use grand juries to bring criminal
charges, although many still do.
Powell v. Alabama (1932). Ozie Powell and six other black
defendants were charged with raping two white girls. The
defendants, who were poor, young and uneducated, were tried
without assistance of counsel. An all-white jury found them
guilty and sentenced them to death. Dividing 7-2, the Supreme
Court reversed the convictions, holding that the defendants had
been denied due process of law. The Court stopped well short of
saying that all indigent defendants must be provided counsel in
all felony cases. Rather it limited its holding to the facts, saying
that “in a capital case, where the defendant is unable to employ
counsel, and is incapable adequately of making his own defense
because of ignorance, feeble-mindedness, illiteracy, or the like,
it is the duty of the court, whether requested or not, to assign
counsel for him a as a necessary requisite of due process...”
Scott v. Illinois(1979). Scott was arrested for and convicted of
shoplifting; however, Scott was unable to afford counsel to
represent him. The statute on point set the maximum penalty
for shoplifting at a $500 fine and/or one year in jail. Scott
requested the appointment of counsel; however, the trial court
denied his request. The Supreme Court held the Sixth and
Fourteenth Amendments require “that no indigent criminal
defendant be sentenced to a term of imprisonment unless the
State has afforded him the right to assistance of appointed
counsel in his defense.” However, the Court also held that the
Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments “do not require a state trial
court to appoint counsel for a criminal defendant, such as Scott,
who is charged with a statutory offense for which imprisonment
upon conviction is authorized but not imposed.” Therefore, the
Court explained that Argersinger v. Hamlin “limits the
constitutional right to appointed counsel in state criminal
40. proceedings to a case that actually leads to imprisonment.”
Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966). The defendant was convicted of
murdering his wife by “bludgeoning” her to death. The issue in
this case was the pretrial publicity. There was “virulent and
incriminating publicity” about the defendant. The murder case
was “notorious, and the news media frequently aired charges
and countercharges besides those for which defendant was
tried.” The defendant was examined “for more than five hours
without counsel in a televised three-day inquest conducted
before an audience of several hundred spectators in a
gymnasium.” Moreover, the “newspapers published the names
and addresses of prospective jurors causing them to receive
letters and telephone calls about the case.” Also, the trial took
place during a highly contested election, “at which the chief
prosecutor and the trial judge were candidates for judgeships.”
The media took over the courtroom, and they “hounded” the
defendant and witnesses. Members of the media inside the
courtroom often caused consfusion and disruptions. As a result,
the defendant filed a habeas corpus petition on the grounds that
he was denied a fair trial in the judge’s failure to take “effective
measures against massive publicity … or to take adequate steps
to control the conduct of the trial.” The Supreme Court held
that the “massive, pervasive, and prejudicial publicity”
prevented the defendant from receiving a fair trial required by
the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The
Court noted that while “freedom of discussion should be given
the widest range compatible with the fair and orderly
administration of justice, it must not be allowed to divert a trial
from its purpose of adjudicating controversies according to
legal procedures based on evidence received only in open court.
The Court gave orders to release the defendant unless tried
again “within a reasonable time.”
Stack v. Boyle(1951). Twelve individuals were arrested and
convicted of conspiring to violate the Smith Act. Their bail was
41. initially set at different amounts ranging from $2,500 to
$100,000; but later was fixed “pending trial in the uniform
amount of $50,000.” Each defendant moved for a reduction in
bail under the theory that the $50,000 was “excessive under the
Eighth Amendment.” The Government’s only argument against
lowering the bail was that four other individuals previously
convicted under the Smith Act “had forfeited bail.” While the
Government presented no evidence relating specifically to the
twelve individuals in the present prosecution, the US District
Court denied the motion to reduce bond. The Supreme Court
held that the bail was not “fixed by proper methods.” The Court
stated that bail “set before trial at a figure higher than an
amount reasonably calculated to fulfill the purpose of assuring
the presence of the defendant is ‘excessive’ under the Eighth
Amendment.” The Court went on to establish the standards for
setting bail by stating that the amount of bail “must be based
upon standards relevant to the purpose of assuring the presence
of that defendant.”
United States v. Calandra(1974). Calandra’s place of business
was searched pursuant to a warrant for the specific purpose of
seizing bookmaking records and wagering paraphernalia for a
gambling investigation. During the course of the search, an
agent, knowledgeable of a pending investigation regarding
loanskarking activities, discovered and seized a loansharking
record. As a result, a grand jury was convened to investigate
loansharking, which subpoenaed Calandra to appear before it
for the purposes of questioning him on the seized evidence.
Calandra refused to testify on Fifth Amendment grounds against
self-incrimination. Calandra then moved to suppress the
loansharking evidence seized during the search of his office on
the grounds that the affidavit supporting the warrant was
insufficient and that the search exceeded the scope of the
warrant. The trial court granted the motion and futher ordered
that Calandra did not have to answer any questions posed by the
grand jury related to the loanskarking evidence. However, the
42. Supreme Court held that “a witness summoned to appear and
testify before a grand jury may not refuse to answer questions
on the ground that they are based on evidence obtained from an
unlawful search and seizure.” The Court, speaking through
Justice Powell, reinforced the notion that the exclusionary rule
is a “judicially created remedy designed to safeguard Fourth
Amendment rights generally through its deterrent effect on
future unlawful police conduct, rather than a personal
constitutional right of the party aggrieved.” As a result of this
purpose, the Court held that “allowing a grand jury witness to
invoke the exclusionary rule would unduly interfere with the
effective and expeditious discharge of the grand jury’s duties,
and extending the rule to grand jury proceedings would achieve
only a speculative and minimal advance in deterring police
misconduct at the expense of substantially impeding the grand
jury’s role.” As a result, the exclusionary rule does not apply in
grand jury proceedings.
United States v. Salerno(1987).Here the Supreme Court was
asked to rule on the constitutionality of the Bail Reform Act of
1984 (Act), which requies “courts to detain prior to trial
arrestees charged with certain serious felonies when the
Government demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that
no release conditions ‘will reasonably assure … the safety of
any other person and the community’.” At the hearing required
under the Act, the accused is affoard the “right to counsel, to
testify, to present witnesses, to proffer evidence, and [the right]
to cross-examine witnesses.” In making its determination
whether to grant bail, the Act specifies certain factors to be
considered by a court, including “the nature and seriousness of
the charges, the substantiality of the Government’s evidence,
the defendant’s background and characteristics, and the nature
and seriousness of the danger posed by his release.” The
Supreme Court ruled that the Bail Reform Act of 1984 is not
unconstitutional “given the Act’s legitimate and compelling
regulatory purpose and the procedural protections it offers” to
43. the accused. The Court’s examination of the legistlative history
revealed the Act was not intended as pretrial punishment, but
rather “as a potential solution to the pressing societal problem
of crimes committed by persons on release” and to prevent
“danger to the community.” As a result, there is no
constitutional right to bail under the Eighth Amendment.
Weeks v. United States (1914). The Court held that evidence
obtained by federal agents in violation of the 4th Amendment
may not be used in a federal prosecution. Justice Day’s opinion
for the Court suggested that exclusion of tainted evidence was
implicit in the requirements of the Fourth Amendment: “If
letters and private documents can thus be [illegally] seized and
held and used in evidence against a citizen accused of an
offense, the protection of the 4th Amendment ... is of no value
... and might as well be stricken from the Constitution.”
Chapter 6
Batson v. Kentucky (1986). Batson, an African-American man,
was on trial for burglary and receiving stolen goods. The
prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike all four
blacks from the venire, which led to an all-white jury being
impaneled. The judge denied the defendant’s motion to
discharge the jury. Batson was convicted on both counts and the
state supreme court affirmed. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed,
holding that Batson had been denied a fair trial due to the
purposeful exclusion of blacks from the jury. Under Batson, the
trial judge has the responsibility to scrutinize peremptory
challenges. If the judge determines that they are racially
motivated, they must be disallowed or the jury discharged.
In re Death of Eric Miller (2003). Eric Miller died as a result
of arsenic poisoning in 2000. The police investigation revealed
on the night of November 15, Eric Miller and his wife, Ann
Rene, went bowling with several of Ann Rene’s co-workers.
While bowling, Eric Miller consumed a portion of a beer given
44. to him by Derril Willard, upon which Miller commented that the
beer “had a bad or ‘funny’ taste.” The following day Eric
Miller was admitted to the hospital for arsenic poisoning, but
was discharged several days later. On December 1, 2000 Miller
became extremely ill, and the next day Miller died from arsenic
poisoning. After Miller’s death, Ann Rene claimed that she was
unaware of anyone that would want her husband dead. The
police interviewed everyone at the bowling alley in November,
with the exception of Willard, whom the police could not
locate. After Miller’s body was cremated, Ann Rene refused
further interviews with the police. After Miller died, Willard
sought legal advice from attorney Richard Gammon, and
Willard subsequently committed suicide. The State filed a
“Petition in the Nature of a Special Proceeding” requesting that
the trial court to “determine whether the attorney-client
privilege should be waived or whether compelled disclosure of
communications between [Gammon] and Willard was warranted
for the ‘proper administration of justice’.” The judge ordered
Gammon to “provide the trial court with a sealed affidavit
containing information relevant to the murder investigation …
that was obtained from his attorney-client relationship with
Willard.” The judge would then examine the affidavit in
camera to determine whether the information should be
disclosed to the State. The North Carolina Supreme Court held
“when a client is deceased, upon a non-frivolous assertion that
the privilege does not apply, with a proper, good-faith showing
by the party seeking disclosure of communications, the trial
court may conduct an in camera review of the substance of the
communications.” The court went on to state that when
communications “between the attorney and the deceased client
relate solely to a third party, such communications are not
within the purview of the attorney-client privilege.” The court
gave the trial court instructions in that should it find “that some
or all of the communications are outside the scope of the
attorney-client privilege, the trial court may compel the attorney
to provide the substance of the communications to the State for
45. its use in the criminal investigation.” However, the court
refused to determine whether “any information provided by any
attorney [in these circumstances] would be admissible in any
future criminal prosecution.”
Jackson v. State (1987). John William Jackson was charged and
convicted of first-degree murder and armed burglary. At the end
of the State’s proof, and again at the end of the defense’s proof,
Jackson moved for a judgment of acquittal, but the trial court
denied the motions and sentenced Jackson to life imprisonment
with a minimum mandatory term of twenty-five years. Jackson
appealed. The Florida Court of Appeals, speaking through
Acting Chief Judge Scheb, reversed the trial court’s denial of
the defendant’s motion and vacated his convictions and
sentence. The court held that when the state’s evidence is
primarily circumstantial, the appellate court’s role “is to
determine whether the jury might have reasonably concluded
that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis but that
of guilt.” The court went to say that “the weight of the
evidence is a matter for the trier of fact, and a jury verdict
should not be reversed when there is substantial, competent
evidence to support it.” However, when a “criminal conviction
… is based solely on circumstantial evidence, it is [the court’s]
duty to reverse the conviction when that evidence, although
strongly suggesting guilt, fails to eliminate any reasonable
hypothesis of innocence.” The evidence against Jackson did not
include “substantial, competent evidence to support the jury’s
verdict,” and as a result, the court vacated the convictions and
sentence.
Rico v. Leftridge-Byrd (2003). Joseph Rico was convicted by a
Philadelphia County jury of murder and criminal conspiracy,
and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Rico filed several
post-trial motions, including a motion that “alleged … the
prosecutor exercised seven of twenty peremptory challenges
against Italian American prospective jurors in violation of the
Equal Protection Clause under Batson v. Kentucky. The trial
court denied relief. On appeal, the Superior Court found that
46. “all but two of the stuck jurors” were dismissed in violation of
the Equal Protection Clause under Batson v. Kentucky, reversed
Rico’s convictions and granted a new trial. However, the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed, holding “that the
Superior Court erred in rejecting the trial court’s factual finding
of no purposeful discrimination.” Rico then sought habeas
corpus relief in the federal District Court, arguing Batson
violations and prosecutorial misconduct. The federal
Magistrate Judge held in the Report and Recommendation that
Rico’s petition should be dismissed, and the District Court
adopted the position of the Magistrate Judge. The Third Circuit
Court of Appeals held affirmed. The court stated that the trial
court’s denial of Rico’s Batson claim based on the mere fact
that jurors bore Italian American surnames, without any other
evidence to support the allegation of discrimination was not
“objectively unreasonable.” Additionally, the court held where
prosecutors have “mixed motives” for challenging a potential
juror, an action “partially motivated by an improper purpose is
nonetheless valid if the alleged offender would have taken the
same action in the absence of the improper motive.” While one
of the excused jurors was Italian American, he also displayed
fear of the mob when questioned during voir dire. The trial
court held that while the juror’s Italian American decent was a
motivation in striking the juror, it was nonetheless de minimus.
As a result, the Third Circuit held it was not “objectively
unreasonable” for the District Court to deny Rico’s petition for
habeas corpus relief.
Sheppard v. Maxwell(1966). The defendant was convicted of
murdering his wife by “bludgeoning” her to death. The issue in
this case was the pretrial publicity. There was “virulent and
incriminating publicity” about the defendant. The murder case
was “notorious, and the news media frequently aired charges
and countercharges besides those for which defendant was
tried.” The defendant was examined “for more than five hours
without counsel in a televised three-day inquest conducted
47. before an audience of several hundred spectators in a
gymnasium.” Moreover, the “newspapers published the names
and addresses of prospective jurors causing them to receive
letters and telephone calls about the case.” Also, the trial took
place during a highly contested election, “at which the chief
prosecutor and the trial judge were candidates for judgeships.”
The media took over the courtroom, and they “hounded” the
defendant and witnesses. Members of the media inside the
courtroom often caused consfusion and disruptions. As a result,
the defendant filed a habeas corpus petition on the grounds that
he was denied a fair trial in the judge’s failure to take “effective
measures against massive publicity … or to take adequate steps
to control the conduct of the trial.” The Supreme Court held
that the “massive, pervasive, and prejudicial publicity”
prevented the defendant from receiving a fair trial required by
the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The
Court noted that while “freedom of discussion should be given
the widest range compatible with the fair and orderly
administration of justice, it must not be allowed to divert a trial
from its purpose of adjudicating controversies according to
legal procedures based on evidence received only in open court.
The Court gave orders to release the defendant unless tried
again “within a reasonable time.”
United States v. Richardson (2000). Phyllis Richardson was
convicted in federal court of embezzlement, money laundering,
and mail fraud. During the trial, the judge “instructed the jury
that if they did not understand a part of a witness’s testimony
they could submit written questions to the court after the
lawyers ended the examination of that witness.” The court also
“explained to the jurors that some of their submitted questions
might not be asked because the question might be improper
under the rules of evidence and instructed them not to speculate
on what the answer to such questions might be or why the court
did not ask a particular question.” At the time of the judge’s
instruction, Richardson did not object. However, Richardson