Preview

Mayor Giuliani's Quality Of Life Initiative In The Miranda V. Arizona Case

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
751 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Mayor Giuliani's Quality Of Life Initiative In The Miranda V. Arizona Case
Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s quality of life initiative consisted of several details. This was policy that focused on non-criminal activities. There are many types of police discretion. The functions of a patrol division of a police department could be easy and challenging. There are different reasons why Miranda v. Arizona was an important court case in relationship to the police. The Miranda v. Arizona case changed things in Law enforcement. The quality of life initiative was policing that was utilized In New York by Mayor Giuliani and his administration around the nineties. (incite-national.org) The quality of life initiative is defined as the practice of heavy policing which included sleeping, standing, congregating, eating, or drinking in …show more content…
Quality of life provisions that are associated with congregating and using public spaces and even living on the street impact homeless, low income women and trans people of color, and unsecured housed people, and individuals that provide outreach services to people in the community. (incite-national.org) The quality of life initiative is a practice that New York uses as one of their strategies. Their goal has been to improve quality of life policing in the past few years. (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) The Quality of life initiative focused on issues that occurred every day. The community was mainly concerned with disorderly …show more content…
(ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) QOL allows police control crime by taking in offenders, getting knowledge about unsolved cases, and preventing crimes before they get worse. Statistics state that people that violate quality of life policing has a long criminal history. QOL consist of checking people’s background and their identity. When they do an extensive background check it helps police know the location of someone who is wanted on other criminal charges, has warrants, or if they have violated their parole or probation. (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) With this type of policing lets police aware of different crimes in different areas. The QOL helps police because they can ask a person being arrested about other crimes. These crimes can include where guns, drugs and where stolen items were bought and sold. The person may or may not give out the information. Quality of life policing was useful during crime violations that included beer and public urination, gambling, truancy, noise, prostitution, etc. It even stops serious crimes such as murder, robbery, and assault. This policy is also useful for police to intervene in several crimes. According to this policy people that did not have government identification would be taken to the police station to be interrogated. (nytimes.com) They would also be fingerprinted and held until arraignment. It also made summons more

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    FACTS: The cases of Mr. Miranda, Mr. Vignera, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Westover had similar cases, regarding the admissibility of their confessions. These cases were then addressed together by the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Miranda was identified by a witness and arrested, but was not notified of his rights, although he singed a written confession after several hours of interrogation that stated that he was aware of the rights he was not notified about. A jury was presented an oral admission of guilt, as well as the written confession. The jury found Mr. Miranda guilty of murder and rape, and sentenced him to 20-30 years on both counts. Mr. Vignera, who was the second defendant, was arrested for a…

    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Miranda Vs. Arizona

    • 93 Words
    • 1 Page

    Does Miranda vs. Arizona ensure justice and preserve liberty? I believe it does. This even took place during the 1960s.The case in involve statements that were obtained for police from an individual that was arrest. Ernesto Miranda a Mexican immigrant, whom was not aware of his rights, was arrested without his Fifth Amendment given. He was accused of kidnapping and raping a woman. He was interrogated, without formal agreement to do so. Miranda was sentenced to 20 to 30 years in jail. When in court his attorney appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court.…

    • 93 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling of Miranda v. Arizona set a precedence on how future suspects would be interrogated. It makes complete sense to advise a person that is being interrogated that he or she has a right to remain silent during interrogation and that he or she has the right to have counsel present during an interrogation. It's also important that the suspect be fully aware and full understand his or her rights before the interrogation begins. -WRITTEN AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION-METHODS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT By Harvey Wallace and Cliff Roberson(CHAPTER 9 PAGE 136)…

    • 341 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    In the Miranda vs Arizona case Miranda established that the police are required to inform arrested persons that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them, and that they have the right to an attorney. The case involved a claim by the plaintiff that the state of Arizona, by obtaining a confession from him without having informed him of his right to have a lawyer present, had violated his rights under the Fifth Amendment regarding self incrimination. Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape and was interrogated for a long period of time. This interrogation resulted in a signed confession. At court Miranda lawyer argued that the confession was obtained from a person who does not understand their rights. The court agreed that a person should be informed of their rights and understand them before the police…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 2098 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Mіrаndа vs. Arizona was а case that consіdеrеd the rights of the dеfеndаnts in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Indіvіduаl rights did not change with the Mіrаndа decision; however it created new constitutional guidelines for law enforcement, attorneys, and the courts. The guidelines ensure that the individual rights of the fifth, sixth and the fourteenth amendment are protected. This decision requires that unless а suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning anything he says may not be introduced in а court of law (Mіrаndа v. Arizona, 1966). The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow а code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them.…

    • 2098 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Policy is a large part of policing in the United States. Policy helps set law, and law helps keep order amid the chaos if enforced properly. But every policy must be looked at carefully before, during and after enforcement to make sure that policy is and continues to be the best fit for the issues at hand. Sometimes looking at two policies and comparing them can help find a solution in the middle. It is important to give a policy a realistic goal, to accomplish in a realistic time in order to find out if it was truly effective or not.…

    • 929 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The case began with the 1963 arrest of Phoenix resident Ernesto Miranda, who was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Miranda was not informed of his rights prior to the police interrogation. During the two-hour interrogation, Miranda allegedly confessed to committing the crimes, which the police apparently recorded. Miranda, who had not finished ninth grade and had a history of mental instability, had no counsel present. At trial, the prosecution's case consisted solely of his confession. Miranda was convicted of both rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. He appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming that the police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession. The court disagreed, however, and upheld the conviction. Miranda appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed the case in 1966.…

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The high frequency, comprising of 506,471 encounters in 2006, quota based SQF policy has directly contributed to the reduction of violent crime although the policy appears to be fundamentally justified by a “community-caretaking objective” and not prudent reasonable suspicion towards each individual (Ridgeway, 2007; Kinports, 2009). The SQF is also used to gather demographical statistics for future reference as well as bolster officer and department productivity ratings. With this in mind, approximately 90% of the NYPD recorded SQF incidents for 2006 resulted in no criminal findings (Ridgeway, 2007). While “community-caretaking” and the reduction of crime are both viable reason for this procedure, the result provide that nine out of ten people who experienced a SQF were possibly unlawfully questioned and or searched. The NYPD now records incidents indicating the suspicion of crime in a list of checkboxes. This shows what resulted in each Terry Stop, implying accuracy and honesty are present. The results of these findings demonstrate an unclear understanding by NYPD officers of what constitutes reasonable suspicion of a…

    • 983 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which passed 5–4. The Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them.…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona was the case that altered the criminal justice system. It gives criminals the rights they do not deserve. Ernesto Miranda was the man who was responsible for the change in law enforcement. He argued that he was not informed of his rights during his arrest and his Fifth and Sixth amendments were violated. After that, the Miranda Rights were established to protect the suspect from refusing to answer self-incriminating questions and the right to an attorney. The Fifth Amendment’ s rights protection against self- incrimination and double jeopardy, and right to a grand jury indictment . The Sixth Amendment’s right to a speedy and public trial, trial by jury, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and counsel.…

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Perhaps the most notable application of the theory was in New York City under the direction of Police Commissioner William Bratton (Shelden). He and others were convinced that the aggressive order-maintenance practices of the New York City Police Department were responsible for the dramatic decrease in crime rates within the city during the 1990s. Bratton began translating the theory into practice as the chief of New York City’s transit police from 1990 to 1992. Squads of plainclothes officers were assigned to catch turnstile jumpers, and, as arrests for misdemeanors increased, subway crimes of all kinds decreased dramatically. In 1994, when he became New York City police commissioner, Bratton introduced his broken windows-based “quality of life initiative.” This initiative cracked down on panhandling, disorderly behavior, public drinking, street prostitution, and unsolicited windshield washing or other such attempts to obtain cash from drivers stopped in traffic. When Bratton resigned in 1996, felonies were down almost 40 percent in New York, and the homicide rate had been halved…

    • 468 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona is landmark case that has changed history and the manner of how defendants are notified of their rights before relinquishing any information about a crime. Miranda was implemented so no someone else could suffer for a crime and not become aware of their rights. Defendants should be informed of the charges and their rights before they are arrested for any alleged crime. If law enforcement officials fail to properly notify the accused of their rights the chances of them paying the price of crime could possibly be extremely slim to none. Or the defendant may face charges for a crime that he or she did not commit.…

    • 1525 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Today around 1,400 citizens in New York City will have their constitutional rights violated through an unlawful search. The legal term for the controversial search is stop and frisk. The New York Police Department continues to pressure its officers to stop and frisk citizens, and these situations are happening at an alarmingly increasing rate. For the New York Police Department, it seems to be a game of numbers as they continue to force their officers to conduct stop and frisks through quotas (Gangi). While New York City has seen a decrease in crime over Mayor Bloomberg's term, it is difficult to directly correlate the stop and frisk policy with these decreases. This unlawful practice needs to stop as it is a controversial practice that many people believe is a direct violation of the human rights inherent for citizens. Furthermore, it could turn New York City into a police state.…

    • 1108 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Stop And Frisk Essay

    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages

    “Stop and Frisk” has been a very controversial method of policing over the last few years in New York city because of its associations with racial profiling. It has been used as a tool for the government to attempt to reduce crime in a preemptive way by using reasonable suspicion to stop, question, search, and if necessary, detain any citizen the officer chooses. Statistically, almost 90% of stop and frisk suspects in New York city were found to have nothing incriminating and were promptly released. It also had little to no impact on reducing crime and murder in the city of New York. However, it impacted the the rights citizens felt like they had because it instituted a form of social control at the hands of the government.…

    • 1570 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays

Related Topics