Diep 1

Brian Diep

Prof. Starkey

POLS 001

5/18/2017

Midterm Assignment: Adult Prisoners

For this midterm project, I have been assigned to research and create a report on the

underserved community of adult prisoners. Since 2014, there has been approximately seven

million people who have lived behind bars inside correctional facilities and there are even more

who have been released from such correctional supervision. Statistical patterns throughout the

years have shown that those who come from a background of low income or who have only

obtained a high school diploma are at high risk of incarceration. (Breitwieser,

www.brookings.edu). Demographically speaking, majority of people who make up the United

States prison population are adult males. Of those males incarcerated, ten percent are identified

as African American, four percent are Hispanic, and under two percent are Caucasian (Bureau of

Justice Statistics).

Living life in crowded facilities and under strict guidelines is only half the battle for adult

prisoners. Those who have been released from jail, especially those who have committed or have

been accused of committing serious crimes, are faced with discrimination and the difficulty re-

assimilating to normal, every-day life. According to Audrey Breitwiesers report for

Brookings.edu titled, Twelve Facts About Incarceration and prisoner reentry, it is stated that,

People who have ever experienced incarceration are more disadvantaged than are people in the

population as a whole.. Therefore, ex-convicts will have a hard time finding work anywhere in
 Diep 2

the country. Even when obtaining a job, a former prisoner will likely be treated differently

compared to a worker with no criminal record. Whether this treatment is justified or not, it is

clear that this community faces obstacles that would not be an issue for average American

citizens. Despite the fact that the odds are stacked against adult prisoners, there are a couple of

supreme court cases in the past that have worked in their favor.

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was convicted for armed robbery, kidnap, and rape. After

further investigation by the police, physical evidence was obtained and brought to the Supreme

Court of Arizona. During the court case, Mirandas defense lawyer had argued that state officials

did not let his client know of his fifth amendment rights before interrogation. Due to this reason,

Supreme Court officials had decided that although the interrogation was not coercive, Ernesto

Mirandas constitutional rights were still infringed upon. Now, police officers are required to

notify suspects that they have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney in a court of

law prior to detainment. This rule was implemented into the fifth amendment and was later

known as a citizens Miranda Rights (www.oyez.org). Even though Miranda was found guilty of

the crimes accused, his trial had set the precedent for future interrogations and arrests of criminal

suspects. Suspects and inmates have benefitted from this rule because it had fortified their fifth

amendment rights. The Supreme Court case of Miranda v. Arizona (1966), had affected the adult

prisoner community by reducing the occurrence of incarceration due to self-incrimination. While

this Supreme Court ruling helped reduced the amount of self-incriminated adult prisoners,

another court case had helped strengthen their constitutional rights within correctional facilities.

During the year 1976, inmates Donald W. Morgan, John Harrington, and Robert Smith

from the North Carolina Department of Correction were involved in a trial which challenged the

constitutionality of correctional facilities. In this Supreme Court case, which was named Bounds
 Diep 3

v. Smith (1977), the fellow inmates had claimed that the Department of Correction in North

Carolina had violated their first and fourteenth amendment rights by not providing them with an

adequate legal facility. Due to the argument made by the plaintiffs, the court had decided to make

state officials create a plan in which all inmates are to be provided with proper libraries and legal

assistance while incarcerated. In response to the courts ruling, state officials from North

Carolina had added seven law libraries to the correctional facility (www.oyez.org). This court

case was beneficial to prisoners because it allowed them the opportunity to have proper legal

assistance from trained people and access to legal information even from behind bars. With the

incorporation of sufficient law devices at their disposal, inmates can properly file legal papers

and fight for their freedom.

Of all the Supreme Court cases relating to the community of adult prisoners, Miranda v.

Arizona (1966) and Bounds v. Smith (1977) are two of the most notable trials. These two cases

were able to constitutionally secure some of the amendment rights of suspects and prisoners.

However, many other court cases and regulations have done the opposite by making life in

correctional facilities tougher. A significant amount of prisons in the United States are still poorly

maintained and over-populated. There needs to be more local and state prisons available to

prevent these people from living in such tight quarters. Furthermore, officials must find a way to

keep inmates engaged with social activities so that they can have the necessary tools to transition

back into normal life. Since there are a lot of people who leave prison every year, there should be

more available career opportunities for them. Providing jobs to adult prisoners will help them

maintain financial stability; as well as help them move on from their mistakes by starting fresh.

No matter what crime these prisoners may have committed, they are still people who live under

the United States constitution; and therefore, should be treated as equal.

 Diep 4

Works Cited

"Bounds v. Smith." www.oyez.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2017.

<https://www.oyez.org/cases/1976/75-915>.

Breitwieser, Audrey, Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, Greg Nantz, Lauren Bauer, Megan Mumford, and

Ryan Nunn. "Twelve Facts about Incarceration and Prisoner Reentry | Brookings

Institution." Brookings. Brookings, 21 Oct. 2016. Web. 17 May 2017.

<https://www.brookings.edu/research/twelve-facts-about-incarceration-and-prisoner-reentry/>.

"Miranda v. Arizona." www.oyez.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2017.

<https://www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759>.

"State and Federal Prisoners and Prison Facilities." Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). N.p., n.d. Web.

19 May 2017. <https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=13>.