Criminal Justice Essay Paper on The test the court uses to analyze alleged cases of discrimination

The test the court uses to analyze alleged cases of discrimination

The Supreme Court initially interpreted the impact of the Equal protection clause on the processes of jury selection in the case West Virginiah Vs Strauder, a case where the court overturned the murder conviction of an African-American man tried by an all white jury. The presiding Judge held that the barring of a colored individual from the jury contravenes the Equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Laying its arguments, the court asked “of what significance is the Equal Protection if not to pronounce that?” Every criminal is entitled to the services of a jury drawn from a myriad of options devoid of race based discrimination. 

For the court to establish a prima facie showing intended discrimination in the administration of absolute challenges, the defendant must prove that they are a member of a certain race and that the state has used peremptory challenges to exclude jurors of the defendants own race. Secondly, the court may rely on the actuality that the use of peremptory challenges in the process of jury selection offers room for discrimination. And last, the defendant must show that the actualities make inferences that the jurors excluded prospective jurors solely based on their race. Discrimination can also be seen when selecting the jury. Both gents and ladies bring special qualities to the pool. As such, no defendant is subject to have a jury customized for particular defendants along the lines of gender, because this will bring in the element of discrimination. Thus, the jury has to comprise of both male and female, both form the white and colored races.

Explain why vehicle searches are different from other searches

A police officer may periodically pull someone over and on suspicion on anything wrong, may politely ask you to open the trunk so that he or she can search your vehicle. In Arizona Vs Grant, it was held that a police officer can demonstrate an actual threat to their safety posed by an arrested party in order to preserve evidence that justifies a warrantless search. The police can ask to search your vehicle in instances where they suspect that one is driving under the influence of alcohol, or in possession of contraband, or maybe looking for the evidence of a crime inside a car and thus has to search your vehicle without a warrant. This is the first difference between vehicle searches and other ordinary searches like house searches that the police have to obtain a search warrant before getting the chance to enter someone’s house and carry out the search.

Vehicle search differs from search on arrest on the basis of probable cause. The search done on a vehicle is often performed when there is relevantly fair evidence of a fair probability of evidence of either drug ingestion, weapon, contraband, or crime evidence in the vehicle. The search upon arrest is different because it is not an investigative search, but an extractive search because the arrested person has his personal effects confiscated for the sole reason that one has been arrested and will not need the things taken away from him or her behind bars. Thus, it is clear that these two searches differ on this basis.

The third disparity comes when we consider the weapons used during the search. The vehicle searches are normally simple and the officers often use their batons, guns and flashlight to conduct the searches. The other searches, for instance a house search, the police officers may use dogs, other qualified personnel like crime scene investigators, and many more to get the evidence much searched for. Thus, it is a clear difference between the forms of searches conducted by the police.

Works Cited

Arizona Vs Grant, 556 United States 332 (2009). Supreme Court of the United States of America

 Strauder Vs West Virginia; 100 U.S. 303 (1880). Supreme Court of the United States of America.