Comp Reading Lists

MOST RECENT QUESTIONS - FIRST EXAM - AUGUST 2007

Law and Policy
Law Reading list

August 2007

LawI

1) Battered woman’s defense is problematic because it is not clearly an excuse or a justification. It is not clearly an excuse because the very fact that a woman employs violence against a physically abusive male is evidence that she is not suffering from learned helplessness. It is not clearly a justification because it involves a deviation from the two conditions essential for the justifiable use of force—a threat of imminent violence and a response of proportionate violence. (Indeed, if a battered woman were able to demonstrate these two points, she would simply advance a defense of justification.)

Nonetheless, the defense is often appealing in settings where a woman uses deadly force against even a sleeping male when the male has subjected her to physical abuse over a course of years and has threatened her with death should she leave him. Is there a rule that could guide courts in deciding when women are entitled to a jury instruction concerning the defense? If you decide that juries should be allowed to consider a battered woman’s defense, state clearly which factors should entitle someone to it.

2) The development of police professionalism in the four and a half decades since Mapp v. Ohio, Justice Scalia intimates in his opinion for the Court in Hudson v. Michigan, makes the fourth amendment exclusionary rule increasingly unnecessary in the American criminal justice system.

Relying on Scalia’s (far from definite) remarks on police professionalism in Hudson, the state of Jay recently adopted the following legislation. All police officers in the state, its new statute requires, must undergo 30 hours of training every twelve months on the law of search and seizure. In turn, no evidence may be suppressed in the state’s courts on the ground that it was obtained in violation of the fourth amendment to the United States constitution or the analogous provision in the state constitution.

The framework for analyzing the (federal) constitutionality of this statute is established in United States v. Leon and Hudson v. Michigan. Outline that framework; then apply it to determine the statute’s constitutionality.

Policy
The field of criminal justice policy studies “is an inherently multi-theoretic discipline. Instead of a search for a grand unifying theory, a number of ‘theoretical orientations’ exist.” (Zalman, 2007) Of course, even if a field has a number of theories that aim to explain different aspects of why a system works as it does, a researcher can choose one approach and specialize in it. Below are various theories about why certain aspects of the criminal justice system operate as they do. Pick one theory and name one or more scholars who wrote about the theory and developed it. Then think of an example of this theory in practice and describe the operation of some aspect of the criminal justice system with reference to it.

Your answer will: 1) describe the theory, 2) name one or more major proponents (or critics) of the theory, and 3) give an example of a justice system operation that might be explained by the theory.

The theories from which you should choose one to discuss are:

Organizational theory

Feminist or critical race theory
Philosophical rationales for punishment
Constitutional structures as an explanation for adversarial court procedures
Cultural theories about response to crime
A criminological theory (choose one) upon which a particular criminal justice program is based, and whether the program “works” or not depending on flaws or strengths of the theory

Methods and Statistics
Methods and Statistics Reading List available here

The student is given a recent edited article and she/he is asked the following questions:

Section A, Question #1 (ALL PARTS)
1. In your own words, what is the purpose of this study? What are its main questions or hypotheses?

2. From the data provided, what did the study find? How do you know? Point to the evidence from the tables, and be specific.

3. What are the limitations of this study's design? What are its strengths?

4. Describe a different methodology that could have been used to address these questions/hypotheses. What would have been the strengths and weaknesses of your alternative design, compared to what was done by these authors? In what way could a different design have confirmed (or disconfirmed) these results, and how might the different design have added to what we know about the topic?

Integrated Criminological Theory
Integrated Criminological Theory Reading List available here

August 2007

Criminology

(1) Life course criminology is currently one of the reigning paradigms in the field. One major focus of this perspective is explaining "desistance"-- why individuals stop committing crime. The life-course criminology perspective is relatively recent, however, and the field has long been dominated by anomie/strain, culture/learning, & disorganization/control theories.

Select any two micro-level theories from the strain, control or learning perspectives and:

(i) set forth each theory's core propositions-- making sure to highlight each theory's view of human nature, domain i.e., it's dependent variable, what it seeks to explain), & policy implications

(ii) explain how each theory would account for why an individual offender DESISTED, stopped committing crime.

(2) Criminologists disagree about whether there is a "one size fits all" approach to understanding criminal behavior. Certain theorists embrace general theories that seek to explain most if not all criminal behavior, while others endorse more narrow approaches.

Select two general theories of crime, set forth their core propositions - making sure to highlight each theory's view of human nature, unit of analysis, & policy implications-- and critique them. Your critique should highlight both the strengths & weaknesses of the theory, especially in terms of its "generality." What aspects of this theory-- & its empirical literature-- support its claims to generality & which aspects undermine it.

Forensic Psychology

August 2007

I. Identify two areas of Forensic Psychology (related to Criminal Justice) regarding which, despite the existence of considerable relevant research, there remains significant controversy, either within the field of forensic psychology or between the field of psychology and the criminal justice system (or “the law”). For each area, articulate, as precisely as you can, the nature of the conflict; and, for each area, explain how psychological research to date has – or has not – in fact resolved the conflict.

II. Describe and critique the concept of the “psychopath,” focusing on the results of recent research. Also discuss, as fully as possible, how the concept of the “psychopath” adds to, and/or detracts from, an accurate understanding of criminal behavior; and how the concept relates to the criteria for mental state defenses, including the insanity defense.