Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 WhatsApp Us Now
Hudson v. McMillian is a U.S. Supreme court case involving the excessive force resulting in a claim of cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The court’s decision resulted in the five-pronged Hudson test, also known as PANAM:
(P)erceived threat by correctional officers;
(A)ny and all efforts to de-escalate;
(N)eed for the application of force;
(A)mount of force that was used and;
(M)edical issues, and extent of any injuries, that are used to evaluate cases involving any use of force before trial and after conviction.
The test helps the courts determine whether correctional officers’ actions were reasonable, necessary, and conducted in good faith.
Watch the video scenario and take notes as you watch: CJ in Practice Constitutional Issue: Deprivation of Inmates’ Rights
Write a 1–2 page paper in which you:
Summarize the events of this scenario and the persons involved.
Examine the constitutional amendments related to this situation and whether the rights of the inmates in this scenario were violated. Support your opinion.
Determine whether the incidents pass the five-pronged Hudson test discussed above.
Recommend how the sergeant should respond to the officer’s behavior. Support your response.
In this video scenario, an inmate named Mark Phillips is being held in a jail cell at the local county jail. Sergeant Smith enters the cell and orders Phillips to stand up and turn around so he can be handcuffed. However, Officer Reynolds instead grabs Philips by the arm and aggressively slams him against the wall causing him to endure pain. When Sergeant Smith notices this behavior he immediately stops it and recognizes that it’s inappropriate. After getting his handcuffs on, Phillips proceeds with his transfer but still appears to be in some pain from Officer Reynold’s treatment of him earlier.
The constitutional amendments related to this situation include the Eighth Amendment which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. In regards to whether or not this incident violated any of Phillip’s rights, yes there was excessive force used which violates an individual’s right under the eighth amendment as discussed above; therefore, this would be considered a violation of Phillips’ rights as well as potentially violating other inmates who may have witnessed the action taken by Officer Reynolds or had similar experiences due to their incarceration status.
When looking at if these incidents pass through a five-pronged Hudson test: perceived threat by correctional officers (P) – Yes, when Officer Reynolds grabbed Phillps by his arm aggressively; any & all efforts to de-escalate (A) – No, no efforts were made before using force; need for application of force (N) –No ,there was no need for excessive use of force; amount of force used (A) – Yes, too much physical contact was used during handcuffing process; medical issues/extent injuries inflicted (M)-Yes based on observations from Sgt Smith about Philips appearing injured after incident occurred ,it could be assumed that medical attention may be needed for further evaluation . All above factors indicate that these incidents did not pass through Hudson test properly thus implying violations of Philip’s right under 8th amendment took place here.
Given these circumstances I believe that Sergeant Smith should respond promptly with disciplinary actions towards Officer Reynolds such as issuing a verbal warning first or depending on severity also face suspension/termination and even possible legal charges if necessary given gravity of issue at hand while ensuring protectionofPhillips’rightsin future occurrences are secured since such instances cannot go unchecked in today’s organizational settings especially regarding human resource management goals like job satisfaction& employee retention rates etc..