Name and describe significant court cases that have had an impact on the practices of probation and parole

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

• Sampson v. California. Police officers may conduct a warrantless search of an individual subject to a parole search condition, even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing and even when the sole reason for the search is the person's parole status.
• U.S. v. Knights. The warrantless search authority normally reserved for probation and parole officers extends to the police when supported by reasonable suspicion and authorized by probation conditions.
• Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole v. Scott: The Griffin decision was applied to parolees.
• Griffin v. Wisconsin: The Supreme Court held that probation officers may conduct a search of a probationer's residence without a warrant or without probable cause.
• Minnesota v. Murphy: States that incriminating statements to a probation officer may be used as evidence if the probationer does not specify a right against self-incrimination.
• Bearden v. Georgia: Established that probation cannot be revoked for failure to pay a fine and make restitution if it cannot be shown that the defendant is responsible for the failure.
• Greenholtz v. Nebraska Penal Inmates: Established that parole boards do not have to specify the evidence used in deciding to deny parole.
• Gagnon v. Scarpelli and Morrissey v. Brewer: Declared a need for procedural safeguards for probationers and parolees, respectively.
• Mempa v. Rhay. Notice and a hearing are required before probation revocation, and probationers should have the opportunity for representation by counsel before a deferred prison sentence is imposed.
• Escoe v. Zerbst: Argued that the revocation of probation without notice or hearing was acceptable practice.