Tag Archives: AR

Arson Investigation

Arson Investigation

Arson Investigation

In line with Angelo Pisani

about Arson Investigation in the Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement:

Humankind has no doubt been destroying property and life with fire since it was first discovered. Historically, setting fire to your enemy's property has been a common form of retribution. Determining the cause of such a fire is an art that dates back to at least 300 B.C.E., where Roman law decreed that the “Quarstionarius”-the Roman equivalent of today's state fire investigator-determines the cause of all fires. During the 1800s, the predominant image of the arsonist shifted to that of the pyromaniac, or one who could not fight off the compulsion to start fires. Today, we recognize that arson has a variety of motives, such as revenge, profit, vandalism, fraud, excitement/thrill seeking, hero/vanity, concealment of another crime, and terrorism. The events of September 11, 2001, mark one of the deadliest and most costly arsons the world has ever seen.

Arizona v. Fulminante

Arizona v. Fulminante

Arizona v. Fulminante as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Fulminante is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Fulminante may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Fulminante tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Fulminante is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Fulminante impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Fulminante

499 U.S. 279 (1991)

Arrests Quotas

Arrests Quotas

Tickets and Arrests Quotas

In line with Camille Gibson

about Arrests Quotas in the Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement:

Law enforcement quotas for the issuance of traffic tickets (citations) are illegal. According to many police union representatives, however, they do exist in practice under other names like “performance expectations,” “performance standards,” “performance criteria,” “quantitative expectations,” “statistical targets,” and “traffic goals.” According to police ethics, quotas requiring a certain number of tickets over a certain time period would be unethical, because this could be seen as coercing law enforcement officers to issue tickets when they might not otherwise do so in order to avoid administrative reprisal or a negative work evaluation. State laws might also specify that quotas for traffic stops and traffic warnings are illegal. For instance, at least 12 states have passed laws to prohibit any law enforcement agency from requiring traffic officers to meet quotas for numbers of traffic stops or arrests. In general, rank and file police usually support such legislation, as do agencies.

Arizona v. Johnson

Arizona v. Johnson

Arizona v. Johnson as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Johnson is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Johnson may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Johnson tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Johnson is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Johnson impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Johnson

555 U.S 323 (2009)

Arizona v. Mauro

Arizona v. Mauro

Arizona v. Mauro as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Mauro is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Mauro may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Mauro tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Mauro is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Mauro impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Mauro

481 U.S. 520 (1987

Arizona v. Gant

Arizona v. Gant

Arizona v. Gant as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Gant is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Gant may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Gant tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Gant is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Gant impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Gant

556 U.S. 332 (2009)

Arizona v. Hicks

Arizona v. Hicks

Arizona v. Hicks as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Hicks is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Hicks may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Hicks tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Hicks is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Hicks impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Hicks

480 U.S. 321 (1987)

Arizona v. Roberson

Arizona v. Roberson

Arizona v. Roberson as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Roberson is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Roberson may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Roberson tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Roberson is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Roberson impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Roberson

486 U.S. 675 (1988)

Army Criminal Investigation

Army Criminal Investigation

Criminal Investigation Command, Department of the Army, Department of Defense

In line with Robyn Diehl Lacks & Brian Kessler Lacks

about Army Criminal Investigation in the Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement:

The United States Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC) houses all major United States Army investigative operations. The Criminal Investigation Command (CID) is the major component of the USACIDC and is its primary criminal investigative organization. The creation of USACIDC and CID can be traced back to the mid-1800s with the creation of the Continental Army and the creation of the Office of the Provost Marshal in 1776, followed two years later by the organization of the Provost Corp. This was followed by passage of the Enrollment Act in March 1863, the first draft law, which forced Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to create a police force to enforce the unpopular law and to arrest those who attempted to desert. During the Civil War the newly created Army Police Force only investigated criminal acts based on the Enrollment Act.

Criminal Investigation Division of the Environmental Protection Agency

In line with Lisa Thomas Briggs

about Army Criminal Investigation in the Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement:

The primary function of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to implement and enforce pollution control laws enacted by Congress. A staff of approximately 150 special field agents assigned to the EPA's Criminal Investigation Division (CID) is responsible for pursuing violators of these laws. CID is essentially the law enforcement and investigative branch of the EPA. Although environmental crimes (there is more information about criminal law in the American Legal Encyclopedia and about crimes and criminals vocabulary) are defined broadly, they have in common that they endanger human, animal, or plant life through misuse of the overall environment, whether through industrial waste, pollution, or other harmful acts that threaten the land, air, or water supply. About half of all EPA investigations involve violations of toxic waste transportation laws and illegal dumping of hazardous materials. In addition to criminal prosecutions, the EPA also relies on administrative and civil sanctions to curtail violations of federal environmental laws.

Arizona v. Evans

Arizona v. Evans

Arizona v. Evans as a Leading U.S. Case

Arizona v. Evans is one of the leading United States Supreme Court decisions impacting law enforcement in the United States, and, in this regards, Arizona v. Evans may be a case reference for attorneys and police officers. As a leading case, this entry about Arizona v. Evans tries to include facts, relevant legal issues, and the Court's decision and reasoning. The significance of Arizona v. Evans is also explained, together with the relevance of Arizona v. Evans impact on citizens and law enforcement.

Citation of Arizona v. Evans

514 U.S. 1 (1995)