Appeals, Apointments, and Attorneys

1. The state of Tennessee selects its high court/supreme court judges in uncontested retention elections after initial appointment

2.Tennessee selects its intermediate appellate court judges through uncontested retention elections after initial appointment.

3.Trial court judges in Tennessee are selected through partisan elections for all general jurisdiction trial court judges.

Some of the benefits of selecting judges through popular elections are that the voice of the people is actually heard when this happens and that because of this the judge selected may better represent his or her constituents. Some of the drawbacks of selecting judges through popular elections are that the judges may not be selected based on their integrity or merits of accomplishment, but rather on their persona or other extraneous and irrelevant factor. Another drawback is that the selected judges may only be concerned with being re-elected instead of doing his or her job (ABA 2009).

The highest level in the Tennessee court system is the state Supreme Court, which has 5 justices. Underneath the Supreme Court are the Court of Appeals and Court of Criminal Appeals, which have three divisions each. Below that are the 31 judicial districts, comprised of the Circuit Court, which has 85 judges; the Chancery Court and Probate Court, which has 34 chancellors and 2 judges; and the Criminal Court, which has 33 judges. Beneath those courts are the Juvenile Court, which is made up of 98 courts and has 17 judges in addition to 93 judges from the General Sessions Court, and the Municipal Court, which is made up of roughly 300 courts and has 251 judges. The lowest levels in the court system are the General Session Court, which has 151 judges, 93 of whom serve the Juvenile Court. 93 counties use the General Session Court, and 2 additional counties have a trial justice court (“Tennessee court system,” 2007).

Recent Felony Arrest

The suspect was speeding on Interstate 40 and was pulled over by a Tennessee Highway Patrol trooper, and arrested a fugitive wanted in Washington D.C. A court of General Jurisdiction would hear this case

Tenn. Traffic Stop Nets Felony Arrest, $100K in Duffel Bag. (2008 January, 15) retrieved (2009 October, 26) from Policeone.com website: http://www.policeone.com/police-products/duty-gear/bags-cases/articles/1650481-Tenn-traffic-stop-nets-felony-arrest-100K-in-duffel-bag/#

Recent Court Appeal

The case is being appealed based on the new ruling of the Tennessee Court of Appeals that the “paramour clause” can’t force the court to make decisions that are in the best interests of the children. The case will be sent back to the trial court. A Court of General Jurisdiction would hear this case.

Tennessee Appeals Court Unanimously Upholds the Rights of Lesbian Mom. 2009, (September, 21) retrieved (2009 October 26) from eNews Park Forest website: http://www.enewspf.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10279:tennessee-appeals-court-unanimously-upholds-rights-of-lesbian-mom-&catid=88888935:gay-and-lesbian&Itemid=88890242

American Bar Association. (2009, October 27). ABA

FACT SHEET ON JUDICIAL SELECTION METHODS IN THE STATES. Retrieved from httzp://www.abanet.org/leadership/fact_sheet.pdf

(2007). Tennessee court structure as of 2007. Retrieved from http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Research/Ct_Struct/state_inc.asp?STATE=TN

Image From: http://www.gaycoupleslawblog.com/uploads/image/iStock_000008206152XSmall.jpg

Searches and Seizures in Society

The article that was posted on the New York Times website was about the ruling of a case through police misconduct. The officer pulled over a gentleman, known as Bradley Harrison, who was driving a rented vehicle with over seventy-seven pounds of cocaine in the back of his vehicle. When the police officer pulled him over due to missing a front-end license plate, which is acceptable within the country of Alberta, where you’re not required to have one in the front, he began to proceed on a search on the vehicle where he found the disturbing evidence. As a result, the court system agreed to the police misconduct but not to suppress the evidence that was found in the back of Harrison’s truck (Liptak, 2008). The article goes on about different countries and their methods of police misconduct and how they don’t suppress evidence due to police misconduct. However, the United States tends to be the only country that suppresses evidence immediately after police misconduct has been found, due to the act of the exclusionary rule. The exclusion of evidence should never occur in any case which evidence is found. If police misconduct is found, even if the people have the right from unlawful searches, the officer should be tried for misconduct where he would receive a hearing to maintain his badge or lose it and be required to some sort of training or punishment for the violation of civil rights. As for the victim, the victim should never be released to police misconduct or a violation of their rights. However a strong, reduced sentence for the violation he or she has committed should be sufficient because of the fact that he was still doing something completely illegal in the country’s eyes. As for the exclusionary rule, it should be set to scale depending on the violation. For example, if the officer who performed the misconduct found a small amount of drugs within your vehicle, it should be easy enough to say that it’s not that big of a deal but suggest that they should really receive some help. However if police misconduct is found and you found a bomb in the vehicle lets say, to exclude such evidence towards the individual would be a little harder than the case of a small amount of drugs.

In April 2007, a law enforcement officer heard that a woman, Charlotte Yvonne Turner, who was on parole for having sold drugs, was selling cocaine. Shortly after, the officer pulled her over for driving without a seatbelt, which he later admitted to being a pretext. His intentions were to find drugs. During the stop, he searched her and found a large sum of cash. The officer and his partner believed it had come from selling drugs, and they decided to search her house. During the search, they found a loaded gun. They charged Turner with being a felon in possession of a handgun (Carey, 2009). The warrantless search described in this case is a combination of two different forms of an automobile search. The officer both searched the driver and performed a pretext stop. “A pretext stop is one in which police officers stop a car because they suspect the driver is involved in a crime such as drug trafficking, but, lacking probable cause, they use a pretext such as a minor traffic violation to stop the car and search its interior” (Siegel, 2009). Officers are allowed to search the driver and the passenger of a car in order to secure their own safety. The officer did not obtain a warrant due to the fact that he had probable cause at the moment to search Turner. The judge ruled that the search in the home was unlawful, and the Court of Criminal Appeals supported his decision. The Supreme Court then overturned the judge’s ruling and ordered the case back to court. On October 15, 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that “people on probation should not expect the same degree of legal privacy enjoyed by private citizens who have not been convicted of a crime” (Carey, 2009). This ruling increased the power of Tennessee law enforcement, regarding warrantless searches.

The purpose of the Miranda warning is to protect people's fifth and fourteenth amendments. The Miranda Warning means that suspects in custody must be told that they have the following rights:
~"They have the right to remain silent.
~If they decide to make a statement, the statement can and will be used against them in a court of law.
~They have the right to have an attorney present at the time of the interrogation, or they will have an opportunity to consult with an attorney.
~If they cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for them by the state (Siegel, 2009).

Example Situations in which a person's illegally obtained statements can still be used against them:
1) If a suspect makes an ambiguous reference to an attorney during their questioning they are not protected under Miranda. This includes saying such as "maybe I should talk to an attorney” (Siegel, 2009).
2) "An attorney's request to see the defendant odes not affect the validity of the defendant's waiver of the right to counsel” (Siegel, 2009). If your friends or family hired an attorney for you for example and you made statements voluntarily even though your family hired an attorney, the statements were made before the attorney arrived and therefore are not affected by Miranda Law.
3) "A suspect can be questioned in the field without a Miranda warning if the information the police seek is needed to protect public safety” (Siegel, 2009). For example in an emergency, if the police ask you where you hid your weapons.

Carey, Clay (2009, October 16). Tennessee police have more power to search without warrants. The Tennessean. Retrieved from http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091016/NEWS03/910160343/-1/RSS05.

Liptak, Adam (2008, July 19). U.S. is alone in rejecting all evidence if police err. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/19/us/19exclude.html?_r=1.

Siegel, L.J. (2009). Introduction to criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Image retrieved from: http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2005/august2005/august05leb_img_16.jpg

Babes, Broward, and Brutality

1.) Are police reports written by female officers more accurate than those written by male officers? Females may write more accurate reports because women pay more attention to detail than men.
2.) Do female officers make more arrests on domestic violence calls than male officers? Since women are more likely to have been victims of domestic violence themselves, they may empathize with the victim more than a man would.
3.) If a pursuit on foot is necessary, are male officers more successful in apprehending the suspect? Since males are physically faster and stronger, they may be more able to outrun or overpower the suspect.
4.) Do male officers work a greater amount of or longer shifts than female officers? Male officers may be less likely to take time off to attend to children at home.
5.) Are male officers more likely to engage in racial profiling? Women tend to pay a great deal of attention to social issues and may be more likely to be sympathetic to minorities
These are all questions we need to consider when evaluating the dichotomy of gender.

Police Women of Broward County


(Having trouble viewing the video? Click here)
The Law Enforcer: According to this view, duty is clearly set out in law, and law enforcers’ stress playing it “by the book.” Because the police are specifically charged with apprehending all types of lawbreakers, they see themselves as generalized law enforcement agents. Although law enforcers may prefer working on serious crimes - which are more intriguing and rewarding in terms of achievement, prestige, and status - they see the police role as one of enforcing all statutes and ordinances. They perceive themselves as neither community social workers nor vengeance-seeking vigilantes. Simply put, they are professional law enforcement officers who perform the functions of detecting violations, identifying culprits, and taking the lawbreakers before a court. Law enforcers are devoted to the profession of police work and are the officers most likely to aspire to command rank.
The police in this particular TV show fit the description of “The Law Enforcer” because they do things “by the book” and proceed to carry out the law without hesitation or discrimination. They know what they have to do when they arrest someone and they do it properly. While they sometimes may display behavior more closely associated to “The Social Agent”, they are still for the most part, “The Law Enforcer” types when everything is put into perspective.

An example of police brutality:
Police officers accused of police brutality used excessive force, made threats and tortured a man in Campbell County, Tennessee. The police showed up at the house of Lester Siler and suspected him of drug use. They asked for his wife and son to leave the home. After Siler declined to sign consent for the officers to search his house, the officers tortured him for two hours. The police began to use excessive force by beating Siler with their bare hands and bats, made threats by holding loaded guns to his head, threatening to shoot him, burned him with lighters and other forms of torture. The police officers involved were unaware that Siler’s wife turned on a tape recorder before leaving the house with her son. The acts of torture were caught on tape. (Largen 2005)
The police should have not tortured Lester Siler. In our Constitution it clearly states that cruel and unusual punishment will not be used. Torture is a form of cruel and unusual punishment. The police should have left after Siler declined to sign the consent form and should have requested for a court order and warrant to search his house.


Largen, C. (2005). American Cops Taped Torturing Drug Suspect. Retrieved October 5, 2009, from radio.indymedia.org website: http://radio.indymedia.org/en/node/9797

Image from: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31bKPcyg1eL._AA280_.jpg