The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…
The Constitution gave each state a number of electors equal to the combined total of its membership in the Senate and the House of Representatives. The original method of electing the President and Vice President had proved to be unworkable, and was replaced by the 12th Amendment. The 12th amendment was ratified in 1804. Under the original system, each elector cast two votes for President and no vote for Vice President. The votes were counted; the candidate receiving the most, provided it was a majority of the number of electors, was elected President, and the runner-up became Vice President. The 12th Amendment replaced this system with separate ballots for President and Vice President, with electors casting a single vote for each…
"The history of liberty has largely been the history of observance of procedural safeguards." We agree with this quote because our country is based on the right to have our guaranteed protection of life, liberty and property. Two of the greatest procedural guarantees that insure liberty are the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. According to the Fifth Amendment, a capital crime is punishable by death, while an infamous crime is punishable by death or imprisonment. This amendment guarantees that no one has to stand trial for such a federal crime unless indicted by a grand jury. Further, a person cannot be put in double jeopardy for the same offense by the same government. The amendment also guarantees that a person cannot be forced to testify against himself, and forbids the government from taking a person's…
The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution was signed into law on September 25, 1789 and ratified December 15, 1791 (Benjamin Franklin, 2011). The Fifth Amendment establishes rights that can be applied to both criminal and civil sectors of law. The most used protections of the Fifth Amendment are the right to a grand jury, the protection against double jeopardy, the protection against self-incrimination, the protection against testifying against yourself, and you can’t be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process. When drafting the Constitution, the Farmers had a series of examples to look to in deciding what to include in the document. A lot of it came from the earliest examples of European prosecution, another example was what happened when they decided to colonize and after the colonization.…
In my opinion, I believe that the 4th amendment is both good and bad depending on the circumstances. Sometimes there are people who blatantly have drugs that the cops can't frisk off until they have the warrant. By the time the police get the warrant, said suspect could have already gotten rid of the drugs. However, this also works the other way. Sometimes, the police search other people that they have false evidence on. Then this innocent person gets searched and it makes the searched person look bad in the future.…
The Sixth Amendment provides many protections and rights to a person suspected or accused of a crime. One of these rights is to have his/her case heard by an impartial jury. This right is particularly important based on the fact that the people determining your guilt or innocence should make a neutral decision, based on the facts of the case and what they feel is accurate, not how they see you as a person.…
Maarv, H. (2011, July 6). Can I Serve a Subpoena to Anyone if I Need Him in Court? Retrieved February 26, 2012, from ehow: http://www.ehow.com/info_8698507_can-anyone-need-him-court.html…
The 7th Amendment states that any person who is accused of a crime, where the dollar amount is deemed to be valued at twenty dollars or more, has the legal right to a trial by jury. A jury trial is a panel of randomly selected citizens who will listen to the case in question and together jointly reach a decision on whether the defendant in the case is guilty or not guilty of the crime they have been charged with. The amendment also states that no Court can reexamine the facts from the case, because any decision reached by a jury will stand.…
The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution states: Set out rules for indictment by grand jury and eminent domain, protects the right to due process, and prohibits self-incrimination and double jeopardy. This means that the officer does not determine innocence or guilt. She or he only determines probable cause of belief of guilt. Also, an officer cannot force a person to bear witness against himself. If a person is tried and a verdict is given, that person cannot be tried again. Accused persons cannot be forced to say anything. Eminent domain is the power of a government to take private property for public use, usually with compensation paid to the owner.…
Every individual is afforded the right to counsel in criminal proceedings. It is the liability of the government to provide every defendant facing criminal charges with legal representation that also is considered sufficient (2011). The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees every individual the right to a swift and public trial from an unbiased jury of his or her peers in the state or district in which the crime was committed in (1995-2011). The district should have been beforehand established by law, and to be educated of the nature and reason for the charge, the right to face the eyewitness in opposition of him or her, to have necessary process for gathering eyewitnesses in his or her support (1995-2011). Last, the Sixth Amendment affords and individual the right to have the aid of an attorney for his or her defense (1995-2011). The last statement of the Sixth Amendments establishes that every individual has a right to counsel from the very second he or she is placed in police confinement (2011).…
are expected to tell the truth, even if that truth was to put you in…
The fifth article of the Constitution is devoted to the process by which amendments are proposed and adopted. This article is extremely important, as it allows the Constitution to stand the test of time. Without the amendment process, it is unlikely that the Constitution would have lasted as long as it has. Under the Articles of Confederation it was much harder to pass any amendments; as a result of this the Constitution includes two separate ways in which amendments can be proposed.…
The fifth amendment states that, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”. Would the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination prohibit the government from any of the following: requiring all participants in a lineup to speak certain words; requiring a person to produce income tax records; threatening a person with a reduction in pay in his government job if he does not make incriminating testimonial admissions about a matter not related to his job? A details analysis of the Fifth Amendment and self-incrimination will help us to determine the answer to this question.…
The Constitution provides individuals in the due process model with unalienable rights. Fourth amendment rights protect individual’s rights as investigating officers can only conduct investigations limited to the scope of the case. The Fourth Amendment and the Bill of Rights expressly provides for the protection of defendants' rights by due process. As well, privilege against self-incrimination, defendant has an absolute right to not testify and protection against double jeopardy…
Supporters of Constitutional protections for criminal suspects claim that it is better if some guilty people go free than if some innocent people are convicted. I agree with this statement. The United States Constitution Preamble reads, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Therefore, the Constitution was created in order to protect a country’s rights for liberty, their unjust laws, and freedom from a tyrannical government. Hence the phrase, “secure the…