discussion on 8th amendment
It is required we use cases from our home states. I live in Montana so cases only from Montana can be used. Here are 3 cases you could use, 2 cases are required and must be referenced. No plagiarism and please hit distinguished in the scoring guide.
Gates v. Missoula County Comm’rs 235 Mont. 261 Dec 29, 1988
Allen v Mohoney, 2002 MT 133N Jun 18, 2007
Quigg v Slaughter, 2007 MT 76 Mar 20, 2007
Introduction
The Eighth Amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment. Those protections apply in a corrections setting. You are a warden at a state correctional facility. You were recently assigned to a facility with a history of complaints about abuse that could constitute Eighth Amendment violations. You want to ensure that you are clear on parameters before attempting to develop policy on use of force, confinement, overcrowding, and restraint. You need to do your research.
- Using research for your state in Lexis, locate two cases that provide insight into parameters of cruel and unusual punishment for those in confinement. Summarize the key takeaways from the selected cases.
- Explain how you would rely on that information to develop policy and procedure to ensure Eighth Amendment compliance.
Scoring Guide
Criteria | Non-performance | Basic | Proficient | Distinguished |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main Discussion Post Response (60%) | ||||
Apply critical thinking or problem solving in the main discussion post. 50% |
Does not apply elements of critical thinking or problem solving in the main discussion post. | Applies some elements of critical thinking or problem solving in the main discussion post. | Applies critical thinking or problem solving in the main discussion post. | Applies critical thinking or problem solving to the main discussion post in a comprehensive, step-by-step manner. |
Use credible information or research to support positions, conclusions, or perspectives in the discussion. 10% |
Does not use credible information or research to support positions, conclusions, or perspectives in the discussion. | Responds to the discussion, but some or all of the resources used for support are not credible. | Uses credible information or research to support positions, conclusions, or perspectives in the discussion. | Uses well- developed, relevant support from credible resources or research to support positions, conclusions, or perspectives in the discussion and impartially considers conflicting data or other perspectives. |