Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article Link 10.1: Alexander, R. (1990). The Mapp, Escobedo, And Miranda Decisions: Do They Serve A Liberal Or A Conservative Agenda. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 4(1), 39-52.

During the 60s, several major criminal cases were decided in the defendants favor by the United States Supreme Court. Following each decision, politicians, law enforcement officers, and lay persons decried the actions of the court for handcuffing law enforcement. Moreover, these critics charged, and continue to charge today, that the Supreme Court was favoring accused/criminal rights at the expense of society and victims. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine three decisions—Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), and especially the anathematized Miranda v. Arizona (1966) — that upset law enforcement officers and political officials and to determine if the critics' fears were warranted. A reexamination of the decisions reveals that the United States Supreme Court had legitimate reasons for ruling as it did. Furthermore, Miranda v. Arizona, the most vilified of the three decisions, has had border ramifications for all citizens beyond the narrow view commonly held by Miranda's critics.

1. Summarize the author’s main point(s) in just a few sentences.
2. What potential problems does the author not address with his/her own work?
3. How would you address potential problems and/or future research recommendations that are addressed by the author?
4. Do you see any evidence of bias in the authors work or writing? If so, what is it and why do you think it is there?
5. How has this article expanded your knowledge on the subject and/or challenged your preconceptions of the subject?

Journal Article Link 10.2: Sagarin, E., & Macnamara, D. (1970). The Problem of Entrapment. Crime & Delinquency, 16(4), 363-378.

When, in order to make an arrest, police or other law-enforcement officers, or agents working in their behalf, encourage the commission of a crime, this practice is known as entrapment; it has been frowned upon by American courts and has, in fact, been regarded as sufficient defense provided there is substantial reason to believe the crime would not have been committed had it not been for such encouragement. The courts have argued that the law sullies itself, failing to serve as an example of righteous ness, when it induces someone to commit a crime. Further, the law should not act to increase the temptations for persons with psychological or other predilections toward certain offenses. Finally, entrapment is said to lead to blackmail, extortion, and bribery, and to accusations against completely innocent persons in order to enhance the record of a police officer or to gain leniency for another offender who has aided the entrapment and may be under indictment. The defense of entrapment has been used in cases involving illegal purchases and sales (as narcotics, liquor, and pornography); in prostitution and homosexual cases; and in political cases involving strikes, civil rights, anti-war and black militant actions, and student unrest. In these latter instances, the authors suggest that entrapment (usually by an agent provocateur) constitutes a threat to the democratic process, tending to discredit otherwise legitimate social protest and to stay the hand of social change. The authors suggest guidelines for the use of undercover agents in crime detection in legitimate ways that would not constitute entrapment.

1. Summarize the author’s main point(s) in just a few sentences. 
2. What potential problems does the author not address with his/her own work?
3. How would you address potential problems and/or future research recommendations that are addressed by the author?
4. Do you see any evidence of bias in the authors work or writing? If so, what is it and why do you think it is there?
5. How has this article expanded your knowledge on the subject and/or challenged your preconceptions of the subject?

Journal Article Link 10.3: Sagatun, I. (1988). The Issue of Entrapment in Prostitution. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 4(3), 139-149.

In order to detect and to fight prostitution, law enforcement personnel often use various degrees of encouragement practices. This active involvement by the police in producing the crime often leads to charges of entrapment and illegal behavior. This paper focuses on the issue of entrapment in prostitution and shows how the legal interpretations of entrapment have changed over time and been differentially applied to the various parties involved. In particular, recent legal developments in California which make it easier for police to use encouragement without the fear of entrapment charges are discussed.

1. Summarize the author’s main point(s) in just a few sentences.
2. What potential problems does the author not address with his/her own work?
3. How would you address potential problems and/or future research recommendations that are addressed by the author?
4. Do you see any evidence of bias in the authors work or writing? If so, what is it and why do you think it is there?
5. How has this article expanded your knowledge on the subject and/or challenged your preconceptions of the subject?