Showing Page:
1/6
1
Criminal Law
Student's Name
Institution Affiliation
Course Number and Name
Instructor
Date
Showing Page:
2/6
2
Criminal Law
One of the key elements regarding the United States' governing philosophy is that every
individual, whether a citizen or otherwise, is entitled to certain universal rights that can never be
taken away from them. Such rights also extend to people who have committed heinous crimes
that qualify them to be sentenced to serve in prison. Additionally, there are also legal protections
available for convicted felons, even if such convictions are not as strong as individuals who
aren't convicted. Under the constitution, FindLaw's prisoners' rights contain information about
inmates' legal rights and people uncommonly taken in for criminal acts and criminal links to
related resources.
As noted in the above paragraph, inmates/prisoners are legally protected by the
constitution like other citizens. They enjoy basic rights like everyone else as enshrined in the
constitution, while others are guaranteed for other reasons (Jacob, 1970 p. 227). There are
several ways that an inmate can challenge their confinement. One such way is for being held
unfairly without being charged for a crime in the court of law. Keeping people under
hostage/confinement for lengthy periods without officially getting convicted for the crimes they
allegedly committed is against the law. One can therefore challenge their apprehensions based on
human rights violations. Secondly, one can also challenge their confinement on unfair treatment
and handling as if guilty for even before a proper conviction. The united states criminal justice
system states that a person is innocent unless proven guilty without any reasonable doubt.
Thirdly, under the misapplication of a speedy trial required by the law, a prisoner can question
their apprehension since all people have the right to a speedy trial in the court of law. Lastly, a
prisoner can also challenge confinement when subjected to cruel, unjust, and unusual
punishment. The constitution guarantee that one is free from "cruel and unusual punishment"
Showing Page:
3/6
3
once convicted and incarcerated. If otherwise is done, it amounts to the violation of human
rights. I, therefore, support the cost that comes with the violation of inmate's rights on the state
and the federal government. The constitution must be adhered to, to the letter.
The Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) has a well-developed grievance
procedure that seeks to address individual experience while in custody, including private and
state prisons, country correctional facilities, and centers for transitions (West, 2002 p.79-93). The
policy strictly states the matters that can only be grieved about, including any condition, actions,
policies, or procedures, and a lack of action that personally affects one's comfort of wellbeing.
Furthermore, it also acknowledges issues concerned with harassment or retaliation. The
procedure comprises two steps: filling out a grievance form and filing a central office appeal.
However, it also gives exceptions to emergency grievances, especially on matters that involve
significant threats to health, welfare, or safety. It is a well-thought procedure; however, I feel that
the approval period of 40 days is a bit too much. This is because the complainant may be in a
very dire situation that requires immediate action rather than waiting. Delaying in approving
their request could be detrimental if they face a life-threatening situation while at the place of
confinement.
There exist offenders of different varieties in them places of incarceration. Among them
are the ordinary people and the people with special needs. Anyone can be an offender, and that
why such groupings exist. The five largest groups of inmates with special needs include the
elderly, the terminally ill, people with mental health issues, the disabled, and individuals with
chronic or infectious diseases. Any offender-holding area needs to consider such individuals and
cater to them as per their individual needs. As a commissioner of one of such institutions, I
believe that a compassionate release for the elderly should be granted to such people to allow
Showing Page:
4/6
4
them to spend their final days outside the confines of a prison cell. This is a humane way of
treating such people who encounter a lot due to their old age, including old-age sickness. Also,
the terminally ill should be given a compassionate release to enable them to come to terms with
their misdoings as they live their final moments. Regarding mentally unstable persons, the
institutions should seek the best medical care for them. Some of them can recover from their
illnesses and turn their lives around after their release from apprehension. The best way to
support disabled persons is by providing them with basic support as they cope with their daily
lives. It would also be helpful if a special unit would get established to take care of them as they
serve their sentences. Finally, prisoners with chronic illnesses and infectious diseases need
utmost care to harness their recovery and wellbeing. The best level of medical care, in this case,
is highly required.
Although the supreme court has ruled in favor of defining the death penalty as a non-
violation of the eighth amendment ban on "cruelty and unusual punishment," in my opinion, I
feel it does. The eighth amendment clearly states that the federal government is prohibited from
imposing a harsh penalty on defendants (Reinert, 2015 p.817). Their definition of it not
encompassing the death penalty is beyond anyone's understanding. Capital punishment is the
ultimate most form of cruelty among humankind. It shows a total disregard for human life by
inflicting pain to the defendant and the victim's family members. Therefore, I still stand with my
position that it does indeed violate the policy enshrined in the constitution under the eighth
amendment. The issue on the scope that the jury can implement the violation is out of the
question; illegality remains illegality and shouldn't be sugar-coated.
Showing Page:
5/6
5
References
Jacob, B. R. (1970). Prison discipline and inmate rights. Harv. CR-CLL Rev., 5, 227.
Reinert, A. A. (2015). Reconceptualizing the Eighth Amendment: Slaves, Prisoners, and Cruel
and Unusual Punishment. NCL Rev., 94, 817.
West, J. P. (2002). Georgia on the mind of radical civil service reformers. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 22(2), 79-93.
Description
According to the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, one (1) of the founding philosophies of the
United
States is that each person, citizen or not, is endowed with certain permanent rights. This
philosophy
extends even to people who have committed crimes that warrant prison sentences. Imagine that
you
are a commissioner on the Board of State Prison, and you are responsible for making
recommendations
regarding inmate rights and special circumstances.
Write a 3-to 5-page paper in which you:
Analyze the legal mechanisms in which an inmate can challenge his or her confinement. Support
or
refute the cost of such challenges to the state and / or federal government. Provide a rationale for
your
response.
Analyze the grievance process from a state of your choice that inmates must follow while
incarcerated.
Critique the grievance process and whether it is enough to protect inmates’ rights while
incarcerated.
Provide a rationale for your response.
Examine the five largest groups of inmates with special needs that are discussed in your
textbook.
Prepare one recommendation for each group that management can use to meet the needs of the
special need inmate. Provide a rationale for your response.
Determine whether the use of the death penalty violates offenders’ rights against “cruel and
unusual
punishment,” as guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Justify your
response.
Showing Page:
6/6
6
Use at least three quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other websites do not qualify as
academic
resources.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

1 Criminal Law Student's Name Institution Affiliation Course Number and Name Instructor Date 2 Criminal Law One of the key elements regarding the United States' governing philosophy is that every individual, whether a citizen or otherwise, is entitled to certain universal rights that can never be taken away from them. Such rights also extend to people who have committed heinous crimes that qualify them to be sentenced to serve in prison. Additionally, there are also legal protections available for convicted felons, even if such convictions are not as strong as individuals who aren't convicted. Under the constitution, FindLaw's prisoners' rights contain information about inmates' legal rights and people uncommonly taken in for criminal acts and criminal links to related resources. As noted in the above paragraph, inmates/prisoners are legally protected by the constitution like other citizens. They enjoy basic rights like everyone else as enshrined in the constitution, while others are guaranteed for other reasons (Jacob, 1970 p. 227). There are several ways that an inmate can challenge their confinement. One such way is for being held unfairly without being charged for a crime in the court of law. Keeping people under hostage/confinement for lengthy periods without officially getting convicted for the crimes they allegedly committed is against the law. One can therefore challenge their apprehensions based on human rights violations. Secondly, one can also challenge their confinement on unfair treatment and handling as if guilty for even before a proper conviction. The united states criminal justice system states that a person is innocent unless proven guilty without any reasonable doubt. Thirdly, under the misapplication of a speedy trial required by the law, a prisoner can question their apprehension since all people have the right to a speedy trial in the court of law. Lastly, a prisoner can also challenge confinement when subjected to cruel, unjust, and unusual punishment. The constitution guarantee that one is free from "cruel and unusual punishment" 3 once convicted and incarcerated. If otherwise is done, it amounts to the violation of human rights. I, therefore, support the cost that comes with the violation of inmate's rights on the state and the federal government. The constitution must be adhered to, to the letter. The Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) has a well-developed grievance procedure that seeks to address individual experience while in custody, including private and state prisons, country correctional facilities, and centers for transitions (West, 2002 p.79-93). The policy strictly states the matters that can only be grieved about, including any condition, actions, policies, or procedures, and a lack of action that personally affects one's comfort of wellbeing. Furthermore, it also acknowledges issues concerned with harassment or retaliation. The procedure comprises two steps: filling out a grievance form and filing a central office appeal. However, it also gives exceptions to emergency grievances, especially on matters that involve significant threats to health, welfare, or safety. It is a well-thought procedure; however, I feel that the approval period of 40 days is a bit too much. This is because the complainant may be in a very dire situation that requires immediate action rather than waiting. Delaying in approving their request could be detrimental if they face a life-threatening situation while at the place of confinement. There exist offenders of different varieties in them places of incarceration. Among them are the ordinary people and the people with special needs. Anyone can be an offender, and that why such groupings exist. The five largest groups of inmates with special needs include the elderly, the terminally ill, people with mental health issues, the disabled, and individuals with chronic or infectious diseases. Any offender-holding area needs to consider such individuals and cater to them as per their individual needs. As a commissioner of one of such institutions, I believe that a compassionate release for the elderly should be granted to such people to allow 4 them to spend their final days outside the confines of a prison cell. This is a humane way of treating such people who encounter a lot due to their old age, including old-age sickness. Also, the terminally ill should be given a compassionate release to enable them to come to terms with their misdoings as they live their final moments. Regarding mentally unstable persons, the institutions should seek the best medical care for them. Some of them can recover from their illnesses and turn their lives around after their release from apprehension. The best way to support disabled persons is by providing them with basic support as they cope with their daily lives. It would also be helpful if a special unit would get established to take care of them as they serve their sentences. Finally, prisoners with chronic illnesses and infectious diseases need utmost care to harness their recovery and wellbeing. The best level of medical care, in this case, is highly required. Although the supreme court has ruled in favor of defining the death penalty as a nonviolation of the eighth amendment ban on "cruelty and unusual punishment," in my opinion, I feel it does. The eighth amendment clearly states that the federal government is prohibited from imposing a harsh penalty on defendants (Reinert, 2015 p.817). Their definition of it not encompassing the death penalty is beyond anyone's understanding. Capital punishment is the ultimate most form of cruelty among humankind. It shows a total disregard for human life by inflicting pain to the defendant and the victim's family members. Therefore, I still stand with my position that it does indeed violate the policy enshrined in the constitution under the eighth amendment. The issue on the scope that the jury can implement the violation is out of the question; illegality remains illegality and shouldn't be sugar-coated. 5 References Jacob, B. R. (1970). Prison discipline and inmate rights. Harv. CR-CLL Rev., 5, 227. Reinert, A. A. (2015). Reconceptualizing the Eighth Amendment: Slaves, Prisoners, and Cruel and Unusual Punishment. NCL Rev., 94, 817. West, J. P. (2002). Georgia on the mind of radical civil service reformers. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22(2), 79-93. Description According to the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, one (1) of the founding philosophies of the United States is that each person, citizen or not, is endowed with certain permanent rights. This philosophy extends even to people who have committed crimes that warrant prison sentences. Imagine that you are a commissioner on the Board of State Prison, and you are responsible for making recommendations regarding inmate rights and special circumstances. Write a 3-to 5-page paper in which you: Analyze the legal mechanisms in which an inmate can challenge his or her confinement. Support or refute the cost of such challenges to the state and / or federal government. Provide a rationale for your response. Analyze the grievance process from a state of your choice that inmates must follow while incarcerated. Critique the grievance process and whether it is enough to protect inmates’ rights while incarcerated. Provide a rationale for your response. Examine the five largest groups of inmates with special needs that are discussed in your textbook. Prepare one recommendation for each group that management can use to meet the needs of the special need inmate. Provide a rationale for your response. Determine whether the use of the death penalty violates offenders’ rights against “cruel and unusual punishment,” as guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Justify your response. 6 Use at least three quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other websites do not qualify as academic resources. Name: Description: ...
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4