Law and Justice Blog: 3

Link

This is the case of the State of Minnesota v. Carter. In this case, police were given a tip that certain people in a specified apartment were dealing illegal drugs. They peered through the gap in some blinds of said apartment, where they saw people putting a white substance into plastic bags. After they attained a search warrant, the two people who left the apartment were arrested and searched, and found to have crack cocaine in the car.

It could be argued that the arrest was unconstitutional, seeing as they thought they had privacy, and had gone out of their way by closing the blinds to acheive this privacy from any prying eyes. They attempted to take this to their advantage, but it's not a foolproof argument. Because the police obtained search warrants under reasonable suspicion, there really isn't much that can be argued for the criminals.

There is also that the apartment was not theirs. Therefore such a temporary housing could not grant them the same privacy as their own home. It wasn't their home, therefore, it was basically the same as having the cocaine at work. It was not quite a public place, but they weren't allowed ultimate privacy, either. So, it really wasn't a violation of their rights. It would have been a violation if they were in their own home, or if they hadn't attained a search warrant.

Law and Justice Blog: 2

 Link to Article

This article discusses the "Broken Windows" policy. It stresses on a quality of life in New York City, something that the citizens seem to have been lacking. The strategy is mildly effective, seeing as it discourages crime. It discourages crime in this way : If you commit a minor crime, you still get punished for it. This is like punishing a child for a menial thing, they will fear doing anything higher than that, and will be deterred from doing it. You could say that it infringes on rights, but at the same time, it really doesn't. If the person commits a crime, then they should be held accountable. It is not as if they are being arrested for things that aren't actually illegal.

There really isn't a way to 'get around it' but some criminals may not be deterred, or not care about the consequences no matter what one does. This way is just hoping to prevent it before it happens. The main goal is to scare the criminals off before they decide to strike, more than anything. In this case, it's to make a higher quality of life for the people in the surrounding area.

The police still have to follow Miranda rights (reading them their rights) and cannot do a search without reasonable suspicion, and, under New York's newer law, search someone's car without consent. They still are required to act as proper law enforcement, and cannot step over that boundary.