Selected Constitutional Questions Regarding Federal Offender Supervision

• NCJ Number: 168911
• Journal: New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement Volume: 23 Issue: 1 Dated: (Winter 1997) Pages: 1-28
• Author(s): S S Cook
• Date Published: 1997
• Length: 28 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This paper addresses the impact of an individual's status as a Federal offender on many of his/her rights as outlined in the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights.

Abstract

Two separate, yet related, rights that often impact individuals under Federal supervision are the right to free speech and the right of association. When supervision conditions bear a reasonable relationship to the goals of probation, courts have historically been more reluctant to infringe upon the freedom of speech than the freedom of association. Attempts by courts to restrict associations have been much more successful based on the rationale that the association was restricted with respect to groups that would encourage the individual to repeat criminal conduct. Regarding the Second Amendment's right to bear arms, courts have held regarding people with criminal records that "possession of firearms by a person convicted of a crime is not a right but a privilege subject to government regulation." Regarding search and seizure law, reasonable warrantless searches that involve offenders under supervision have generally been held to be constitutional when related to "special needs" of probation; problems periodically arise, however, when such conditions are used as a "subterfuge for conducting a criminal investigation." A warrantless search must be related to effective probation supervision. Regarding terms of supervision, courts are generally reluctant to classify a period of supervision as violative of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Courts tend to defer to judges in their decisions that establish supervision conditions; however, there is a need to ensure that judges do not overstep their bounds and impose conditions that are unduly restrictive and violative of the constitutional guarantees that most Americans take for granted. 194 footnotes