Officer Jones is a veteran officer with the Smithville police department. He received information that a citizen living in the local housing project was selling drugs. This information was conveyed to Officer Jones by an anonymous caller to the officer on his personal cell phone. Officer Jones immediately went to the housing project and stopped the citizen as he was leaving his apartment. Officer Jones searched the citizen and found drugs.
Write a one to two (1-2) page paper in which you:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format.
Points: 100
Case Study 1: The Officer and the Drug Arrest
Criteria
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D
Fair
70-79% C
Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Identify the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. In your own opinion, discuss if you support his actions or not. Justify your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
Weight: 35%
Did not submit or incompletely identified the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. Did not submit or incompletely discussed if you supported his actions or not. Did not submit or incompletely justified your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
Insufficiently y identified the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. Insufficiently discussed if you supported his actions or not. Insufficiently justified your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
Partially identified the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. Partially discussed if you supported his actions or not. Partially justified your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
Satisfactorily identified the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. Satisfactorily discussed if you supported his actions or not. Satisfactorily justified your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
Thoroughly identified the constitutional amendment that would govern Officer Jones’ actions. Thoroughly discussed if you supported his actions or not. Thoroughly justified your answer using the appropriate case law and Supreme Court precedents.
2. Analyze the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
Insufficiently analyzed the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
Partially analyzed the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
Satisfactorily analyzed the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
Thoroughly analyzed the validity and constitutionality of Officer Jones’ actions.
3. Determine whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Provide a rationale for your response.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely determined whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
Insufficiently determined whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.
Partially determined whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Partially provided a rationale for your response.
Satisfactorily determined whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
Thoroughly determined whether or not Officer Jones’ actions were justified by any of the three (3) ways whereby probable cause can be established. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
4. 2 references
Weight: 5%
No references provided
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
5. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%
More than 8 errors present
7-8 errors present
5-6 errors present
3-4 errors present
0-2 errors present
