Explain the Supreme Court's decision in Griffin v. Wisconsin. How influential is this case in terms of probation supervision?
What will be an ideal response?
In Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987), the Supreme Court held that a state law or agency rule permitting probation officers to search a probationer's home without a warrant and based on reasonable suspicion was constitutional.
All three of the Supreme Court decisions do not provide a great deal of guidance to probation officers on the streets. Griffin, for example, dealt with the constitutionality of one statute in one state. This means that probation officers are mostly forced to turn to state-level Supreme Court decisions for guidance.
You might also like to view...
What are some of the important cases involving police searches?
What will be an ideal response?
Changes in state statutes during the 1990s reflect a belief that young law breakers ought to be held _______
a. In adult jails when they commit offenses b. Accountable for their actions c. In co-educational facilities d. After their arrest regardless of contact with parents
A denial by a suspect is accepted using the "refuse and redirect denials" method
a. True b. False
Why do you think traditional bullying is still more common than cyberbullying? Do you think this will change in the future? Explain your reasoning.
What will be an ideal response?