CJ 500 2-2 Case Brief

Facts: State the facts of the case and why the case went to trial. 2. Issue: State what is at issue in the case. 3. Ruling: State the court’s ruling in the case. 4. Analysis: This section contains the bulk of the brief. In your analysis, address the following: a) In this case, what standard did the court use to determine whether the use of force was reasonable? For instance, what did the court say about judging the objective reasonableness of the use of force? b) What perspective did the court use in determining whether the officer acted appropriately in the use of force? What did the court say about using hindsight to determine objective reasonableness? c) What strategies do you believe should be employed to make sure officers are applying the correct amount of force in any given situation? d) Analyze the connection between the issue of use of force and what criminological theory contributed to the understanding—or misunderstanding—of these issues. 5. Conclusion: Conclude the case brief by summarizing your analysis.

READ CASE STUDY BELOW

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/

PLEASE FOLLOW THE SAMPLE FORMAT AND USE APA SOURCES

CJ 500 Case Brief Guidelines and

Rubric

Overview: Many issues in the United States are focused on the application of force in the field of law enforcement. Questions have been raised as to whether
criminal justice professionals are applying the least amount of force necessary to gain compliance from an unwilling subject. Because of several recent
controversies surrounding the use of deadly force and the treatment of individuals in police custody, many members of society have been extremely critical of
the use of force. These controversial issues have created a negative public perception of law enforcement officers, and there have been demonstrations and
calls for reform in both the training and hiring of police officers.

For this assignment, you will first read and analyze the Graham v. Connor court decision. This decision is the seminal case that articulates when and how use-of-
force situations will be reviewed and judged. As you read the case, consider who the key stakeholders are (police officers, police departments, citizens, etc.) in
the controversy and how this issue impacts the field of criminal justice.

Prompt: After reading the case, write a brief in which you address the elements listed below. This case brief will help you address the impact of similar decisions
in studying your own issue analysis for the final project. Set up your brief as the Sample Case Brief is set up, and include the answers to the questions in the
Analysis section of the brief.

1. Facts: State the facts of the case and why the case went to trial.
2. Issue: State what is at issue in the case.
3. Ruling: State the court’s ruling in the case.
4. Analysis: This section contains the bulk of the brief. In your analysis, address the following:

a) In this case, what standard did the court use to determine whether the use of force was reasonable? For instance, what did the court say about
judging the objective reasonableness of the use of force?

b) What perspective did the court use in determining whether the officer acted appropriately in the use of force? What did the court say about
using hindsight to determine objective reasonableness?

c) What strategies do you believe should be employed to make sure officers are applying the correct amount of force in any given situation?
d) Analyze the connection between the issue of use of force and what criminological theory contributed to the understanding—or

misunderstanding—of these issues.
5. Conclusion: Conclude the case brief by summarizing your analysis.

Reference your textbook reading as well as the case material in your submission. To facilitate this task, refer to the Sample Case Brief document.

Guidelines for Submission: Your submission should be at least 1 page in length (in addition to title and reference pages). It should use single spacing, 12-point
Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Follow APA style for in-text citations and the reference list.

Rubric

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/

http://snhu-media.snhu.edu/files/course_repository/graduate/cj/cj500/cj500_sample_case_brief

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Facts Meets “Proficient” criteria, and
facts are detailed and specific

States the facts of the case and
why the case went to trial

States the facts of the case and
why the case went to trial, but
statement lacks detail or
contains inaccuracies

Does not state the facts of the
case or why the case went to
trial

15

Issue Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with evidence
from the case to support
statement

States what is at issue in the case States what is at issue in the
case, but statement lacks detail
or contains inaccuracies

Does not state what is at issue in
the case

7

Ruling Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with evidence
from the case to support
statement

States the court’s ruling in the
case

States the court’s ruling in the
case, but statement lacks detail
or contains inaccuracies

Does not state the court’s ruling
in the case

7

Analysis:
Standard

Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with evidence
from the case to support
identification

Identifies what standard the
court used to determine whether
the use of force was reasonable

Identifies what standard the
court used to determine whether
the use of force was reasonable,
but identification contains
inaccuracies

Does not identify what standard
the court used to determine
whether the use of force was
reasonable

15

Analysis:
Perspective

Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with citations from
the case to support description

Identified the perspective the
court used to determine whether
the officer acted appropriately in
the use of force

Identifies the perspective the
court used to determine whether
the officer acted appropriately in
the use of force, but
identification lacks detail or
contains inaccuracies

Does not identify the perspective
the court used to determine
whether the officer acted
appropriately in the use of force

15

Analysis:
Strategies

Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with research-
based evidence to support
strategies

Identifies which strategies should
be employed to make sure
officers are applying the correct
amount of force in any given
situation

Identifies strategies to be
employed, but identified
strategies will not help to make
sure officers are applying the
correct amount of force in any
given situation

Does not identify which
strategies should be employed to
make sure officers are applying
the correct amount of force in
any given situation

15

Analysis:
Criminological

Theory

Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with examples of
criminological theory to support
connection

Analyzes the connection
between the issue of use of force
and which criminological theory
contributed to the understanding
(or misunderstanding) of these
issues

Analyzes the connection
between the issue of use of force
and which criminological theory
contributed to the understanding
(or misunderstanding) of these
issues, but analysis lacks detail or
contains inaccuracies

Does not analyze the connection
between the issue of use of force
and which criminological theory
contributed to the understanding
(or misunderstanding) of these
issues

15

Conclusion Meets “Proficient” criteria,
substantiated with evidence
from the case to support a
conclusion

Provides a conclusion that
summarizes the analysis

Provides a conclusion that
summarizes the analysis, but
conclusion contains inaccuracies

Does not provide a conclusion 7

Articulation of
Response

Submission is free of errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, and
organization, and is presented in
a professional, easy to read
format

Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact
readability and articulation of
main ideas

Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas

4

Total 100%

• CJ 500 Case Brief Guidelines and Rubric

Rubric

Accessibility Report

Filename:

CJ 500 Case Brief Guidelines and Rubric

Report created by:

Organization:

[Enter personal and organization information through the Preferences > Identity dialog.]

Summary

The checker found no problems in this document.

• Needs manual check

  : 2

• Passed

  manually: 0

• Failed manually: 0
• Skipped

  : 1

• Passed: 29
• Failed: 0

Detailed Report

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Passed

Needs manual check

Passed

Passed

Passed

Needs manual check

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Passed

Passed

Skipped

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed

Passed

Rule Name
Status
Description

Passed
Appropriate nesting

Document
Accessibility permission flag	Accessibility permission flag must be set
Image-only PDF	Document is not image-only PDF
Tagged PDF	Document is tagged PDF
Logical Reading Order	Document structure provides a logical reading order
Primary language	Text language is specified
Title	Document title is showing in title bar
Bookmarks	Bookmarks are present in large documents
Color contrast	Document has appropriate color contrast
Page Content
Tagged content	All page content is tagged
Tagged annotations	All annotations are tagged
Tab order	Tab order is consistent with structure order
Character encoding	Reliable character encoding is provided
Tagged multimedia	All multimedia objects are tagged
Screen flicker	Page will not cause screen flicker
Scripts	No inaccessible scripts
Timed responses	Page does not require timed responses
Navigation links	Navigation links are not repetitive
Forms
Tagged form fields	All form fields are tagged
Field descriptions	All form fields have description
Alternate Text
Figures alternate text	Figures require alternate text
Nested alternate text	Alternate text that will never be read
Associated with content	Alternate text must be associated with some content
Hides annotation	Alternate text should not hide annotation
Other elements alternate text	Other elements that require alternate text
Tables
Rows	TR must be a child of Table, THead, TBody, or TFoot
TH and TD	TH and TD must be children of TR
Headers	Tables should have headers
Regularity	Tables must contain the same number of columns in each row and rows in each column
Summary	Tables must have a summary
Lists
List items	LI must be a child of L
Lbl and LBody	Lbl and LBody must be children of LI
Headings
	Appropriate nesting

Back to Top

CJ 500 Sample Case Brief

Facts: Mr. Miranda was arrested at his residence, taken into custody, and subsequently brought

to the police station. While in custody at the police station, Mr. Miranda was identified by a

witness who made an accusation and complaint against him. Mr. Miranda was then interrogated

by police officers for approximately two hours. Mr. Miranda subsequently confessed to the crime

and gave a signed, written confession. Mr. Miranda was never advised of his right to counsel or

his right to remain silent. At trial, the oral and written confessions were presented to the jury.

Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape and was sentenced to 20 to 30 years

imprisonment on each count. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona held that Miranda’s

constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession.

Issue: Whether statements that are obtained from an individual who is in custody and being

interrogated are admissible at trial if the suspect has not been advised of his Fifth Amendment

privilege to remain silent and his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Ruling: Confession received in violation of an individual’s Fifth Amendment and Sixth

Amendment privileges are inadmissible in trial if the individual has not been advised of his or

her rights.

Analysis: The court held that

there can be no doubt that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of criminal

court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings in which their freedom of

action is curtailed in any significant way from being compelled to incriminate

themselves. (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966)

As such,

the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming

from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural

safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial

interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person

has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any

significant way. (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966)

The court further held that

without proper safeguards the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or

accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the

individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would otherwise do so

freely. (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966)

Therefore, a defendant

must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that

anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the

presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for

him prior to any questioning if he so desires. (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966)

Conclusion: Based on the aforementioned reasons, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled and

reversed the conviction of Edwin Miranda in the state of Arizona.

Reference

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).