Criminal procedure is composed of two models designed by a law professor in
Stanford University named Herbert Packer, intending to embody the sets of different values running the system of criminal justice in the United States of America. These are the crime control model, and the due process model which are known to be of contrast with each other. Both procedures will be discussed within this paper, showing the similarities as well as the differences of the same. This will also be a mode in figuring out the effects of the policies in criminal procedure by taking a look at the amendments made in the
Constitution of the United States, from the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment. The Bill of Rights of the Fourteenth Amendment will also be of a vital role in achieving the goal of this paper,
The most widely used procedure in criminal proceedings is the due process model.
According to Zalman, as an individual will try with utmost certainty to preserve the standard of upholding his right to life, liberty and property, he will not let go of it without undergoing the rightful due process promised to him as embodied in the Bill of Rights. A police officer, even upon arresting, shall not treat off a person arrested as if he was already convicted as guilty (N.A., 2008). Whether or not a person is indeed guilty should not be the defining factor that would qualify if he is entitled to such process, as everyone is entitled to it evidenced by the Bill of Rights incorporated in the Constitution. On the other hand, this varies depending on the enforcement level that has taken place. The crime control model is then used by law enforcers who have the very responsibility to uphold justice and peace all throughout the State, making sure that those who are guilty of crimes committed will be prosecuted and those victimized be served justice.
Another difference is that in due process, it is known of being of high importance most especially with attaining justice needed by the society as well as the culture. It strengthens the need to prove that a person is guilty beyond reasonable doubt before convicting him. There is, however, a negative impression over the crime control model, as it is known to slow down or even stops the improvement of the system of criminal justice upon arrest of an accused. Such arrest is deemed needed so as to ensure that the victim will be given justice, having a sense of responsibility towards the latter.
Despite their relevant contrasts, it is to be noted that they also possess similarities as shown in the Constitution. Both are based on the Constitution which embodies the correct process to be taken in order to validly exercise the same without prejudicing the rights of a citizen. As stated in the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution that the right of the people to be secure in his house, papers and effects shall not be violated, as well as the right of the people against unreasonable searches and seizure. A warrant of arrest shall be issued upon probable cause personally examined by the judge supported by the oath of affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses, and it must be for a single violation. The search warrant shall particularly describe the place to be searched and the specific person or things to be seized (U.S. Const. Amendment IV) (Zalman, 2008). Such provision must be followed by both models so as not to transgress the Constitutional right guaranteed.
Once this is not followed, those seized will not be admissible as evidence against the accused. The Fifth Amendment, on the other hand, states that every citizen are protected against self-discrimination in which an accused may choose who shall represent them in the case or even opt not to be represented by anyone at all. It is inevitable that questions will be asked. However, because of such right, he has the liberty not to answer until given a counsel in his representation. The case will prosper of there will be a