The Harris decision suggests that defendants have the right to challenge the reliability of a narcotics dog and provides some guidance for judges to follow. Caballes (2005), which established the original precedents for dog sniffs. For a judicial impact study on the reliability of narcotics dog sniffs, it means starting first with the legal precedents that frame the law, in this instance Florida v. You develop an analytical plan and conceptual framework for the research, by identifying initial research questions and conducting a literature review. The initial stage is really no different from that of any other research project. The methodology I follow in conducting this type of research can best be described with a four-stage flowchart. While the examples are from legal research, this process can be used by scholars in many areas. In this blog entry, I am going to use a recent study as a way to illustrate the four-step research process that I use with MAXQDA. My work in this area is currently focused on searches by police of vehicles using narcotics trained dogs. This is done through a review of dozens and often hundreds of decisions from lower courts that seek to interpret, modify, and apply the higher court’s policy and precedent. I seek to understand how lower courts interpret judicial policies established by the U.S. I am a criminal justice and constitutional law scholar, who studies the impact and implementation of judicial policies. Gizzi, Ph.D (Professor, Illinois State University – has transformed how I conduct research. This is a guest article written by Michael C.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |