...Miranda v Arizona Westwood College Miranda v. Arizona Every time someone is arrested the police officer reads them their right, which was not always the case. They read as followed "you have the right to remain silent anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to an attorney, if you can't afford one, one will be provided to you." But why do the officers have to remind the people of their rights, because of the Miranda v. Arizona case. Before the Miranda v. Arizona case people were not reminded or even aware that they had such rights. In the 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape. He was accused of kidnapping and raping a young girl and when the officers arrested Miranda and then the victim identified him. After the trial was done Miranda was found guilty because after being interrogated for a couple hours he confessed to the crime not knowing that the 5th amendment states you don't have to plead guilty if you do not want to. That is what self incrimination is, for example when Miranda was being asked about the crime he did not have to answer he could of just said he plead the 5th and said he wanted to wait for an attorney to both consult him and be with him while he was being interrogated. If Miranda would have known that he had that right he probably would not have incriminated himself. Miranda was also known to have some mental problems and...
Words: 1127 - Pages: 5
...and public safety was becoming a growing concern; police began to treat suspects harsher in an effort to raise conviction rates and promote public safety. In 1966, however, the jurisprudence of the entire US justice system changed when the court of Chief Justice Earl Warren was presented with the case Miranda v Arizona. In this case, the majority decision ruled to protect suspects’ rights, extending equality of protection regardless of legal knowledge or background, not only highlighting the trends of human rights and equality in the Sixties, but also the tensions between criminal rights versus public safety, demonstrating a shift from the conservative ‘law and order’ jurisprudence to more liberal methods of interrogation and conviction. On March 2, 1963, Ernesto Miranda kidnapped a woman (whose name was not released to the press for her safety), drove her into the desert, and raped her. After an eleven day investigation, Detectives Cooley and Young caught Miranda and took him to police station for questioning. During Miranda’s interrogation, he was told he had been positively identified in a lineup (which was false) and that he could not leave until he gave a full confession. Miranda wrote out his confession on a sheet of paper with a preprinted...
Words: 1921 - Pages: 8
...Case Brief #4 I. Citation Montejo v. Louisiana 556 U.S. 778, 129 S.Ct. 2079, 173 L.Ed.2d 955 (2009) II. The Relevant Facts Montejo, who was a murder suspect, waived his Miranda rights and was interrogated at a sheriff’s office. He was brought before a judge for a hearing where he was appointed legal representation. Later that day, two officers visited him at the prison and asked Montejo to accompany them to locate the murder weapon, which he claimed he had thrown into a lake. He was read his Miranda rights again and agreed to go with the officers to search for the murder weapon. Montejo wrote a letter of apology to the victim’s spouse during this time, but he did not see his attorney until he had returned to the prison. III. Case History At his trial, the letter of apology Montejo wrote to the victim’s widow was used as evidence to convict him of first-degree murder and to sentence him to death. The Louisiana Supreme Court rejected Montejo’s arguments based on Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625 (1986) and upheld the conviction, stating that Montejo did not make any sort of request that counsel be appointed to him because he stood mute at his preliminary hearing. IV. Legal Issues Did Montejo genuinely waive his right to have counsel present during his interaction with police? Do indigent defendants have to affirmatively accept counsel to prevent future police interrogations without an attorney present? V. The Holding Montejo did not affirmatively accept...
Words: 325 - Pages: 2
...court System Research the following landmark cases and write brief description of each in your own words. Explain whether you agree with the decision reached by the court. Powers of the President 1952 - Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer In 1952, after the employees of steel companies threatened to strike, the President of the United States Harry Truman (President Truman) ordered the Secretary of Commerce to seize the Nation’s steel companies. The steel companies sued. 1974 - United State v. Nixon The special prosecutor in the Watergate scandal subpoenaed tape recordings made of President Nixon (the “President”) discussing the scandal with some of his advisers. The President claimed executive privilege as his basis for refusing to turn over the tapes....
Words: 487 - Pages: 2
...Kentucky Court Of Appeals No.2011-CA-000187 (On appeal Jefferson Circuit Court, No.2011-CR-000187) Justin Meyers V. Commonwealth Of Kentucky Brief of Appellant, Justin Meyers Brittney H. Moran Moran Law Office 920 Samuel Street, Suite10210 Louisville, Kentucky 40204 Certificate of Service Undersigned certifies that the copy of this Brief of Appellant has been served by first class mail, on Sherry D. Hall, Counsel for the commonwealth Of Kentucky at 600 Market Street, Suite 1002 and Jake M. Moore, Clerk of Jefferson Circuit Court, at 700 West Jefferson Street, Louisville, Kentucky 40202. “INTRODUCTION” This is an appeal of ruling on suppression motion. Appellate was tried by a jury and found guilty of possession of a controlled substance, drug paraphernalia, and first degree murder. Appellate appeals a ruling to allow a motion to suppress evidence found during the search warrant, stating the bloody handkerchief was illegally seized which subsequently led him to being charged with murder. A”STATEMENT CONCERING ORAL ARGUMENT” Appellant request that there no oral arguments because the issues presented in this case are not complex and the court will not benefit from the ability to question counsel. A”STATEMENT OF THE CASE” On November 16, 2010, a search warrant was served to have the premises at24870 Lake View Place Apartment 17, Centerville, searched. This apartment was suspected to be occupied by the defendant. The search warrant allowed law enforcement...
Words: 1595 - Pages: 7
...United States v. Arizona: The Support Our Law Enforcement and Neighborhoods Act is Preempted and Discriminatory Melissa Goolsarran Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 II. Perspective: Immigration, Discrimination, and Limitations on State Laws 3 III. Background: United States v. Arizona 9 A. S.B. 1070 and the Legislature’s Justification 10 B. The Decision: United States v. Arizona 18 IV. Analysis: S.B. 1070 is Preempted by Federal Immigration Law and Also Discriminatory 23 A. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Correctly found that S.B. 1070 is Preempted Because it Interferes with the Administration and Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws 24 B. S.B. 1070 Discriminates on the Basis of Race or National Origin 32 V. Comment and Conclusion: Effects of the Arizona Law 36 I. Introduction The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (“S.B. 1070”) has been the subject of many debates for both its potential impact on federal immigration laws and discrimination against citizens and legal residents of Hispanic origin. The Arizona State Legislature passed S.B. 1070 to reduce the continuous rise in the number of illegal immigrants and alleged consequent rise in crime rates in the state. Among other provisions, the law requires officers to check a person's immigration status, criminalizes an alien’s failure to comply with federal registration laws and working without authorization, and authorizes warrantless arrests where there is probable cause...
Words: 14328 - Pages: 58
...International Law: Valdez v. State of Oklahoma and the Application of International Law in Oklahoma1 I. Introduction “This court has before it a unique and serious matter involving novel legal issues and international law.”2 The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals chose these words to describe Valdez v. State of Oklahoma,3 a case in which a Mexican national argued for postconviction relief from the death penalty on the basis of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR),4 to which the United States is a party. Significantly, Valdez made the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals one of the first state courts to address Article 36 since the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decided Germany v. United States of America (LaGrand),5 in which the ICJ interpreted the controversial provision. Briefly stated, Article 36 grants foreign nationals the right to contact their consulate if they are arrested or detained in a foreign country.6 Such notification allows the consulate to provide legal assistance to the foreign national, who may speak another language or be unfamiliar with the foreign nation's legal system. As might be expected, local authorities sometimes fail to comply with Article 36. In the United States, such failures have prompted foreign nationals to file appeals based on what they consider to be a judicially enforceable right created by Article 36. However, U.S. courts have dismissed such appeals on the basis that Article 36 fails to...
Words: 13325 - Pages: 54
...Andy Abstein Professor: Ortiz Patrol Functions 2 December 2012 Ethical Law Enforcement I chose this subject because I feel that before embarking on a career in law enforcement it is fundamental to understand how to play by the book without getting ostracized by ones peers. The purpose of this paper is to outline proper behavior while paying attention to factors that will effectively limit corruption. The law enforcement oath of honor is as follows. “On my honor, I will never betray my badge, my integrity, my character, or the public trust. I will always have the courage to hold myself and others accountable for our actions. I will always uphold the constitution my community and the agency I serve.” On a daily basis police officers risk their lives to protect citizens and defend liberty. It is a noble and selfless occupation that makes a difference in the quality of life. Before taking the Law Enforcement Oath of Honor it is important to comprehend its meaning. Honor, means your word is given as a guarantee, Betray is breaking faith with the public trust, Badge is your symbol of office, Integrity is adhering to the same code of conduct in private life and public duty, Character is distinguishing qualities of an individual, Public Trust is the faith of those you serve that your conduct will be ethical, Courage is strength against danger fear and non-ethical pressure, Accountability You answer to the office of your oath and are...
Words: 2234 - Pages: 9
...Advocacy Groups - an association of individuals or organizations who unite to actively support or defend an idea, usually to influence policies or resource allocations through media campaigns, public presentations, publicity, and legislative lobbying efforts; GROUP WHO TRY TO RAISE AWARENESS AND INFLUENCE POLITICS AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION advocacy groups are broader. interest groups are more specific. for example an environmental group would be an advocacy group and a group to save the rainforest would be an interest group. Amicus Curiae - “Friend of the Court.” A brief filed in a lawsuit by an individual or group that is not party to the lawsuit but that has an interest in the outcome. SOMEONE, NOT BELONGING TO ANY PARTY, VOLUNTEERS TO OFFER INFORMATION TO ASSIST IN A CASE, WHICH IS WHY IT MEANS FRIEND OF THE COURT Astroturf - refers to political, advertising or public relations campaigns that are designed to mask the sponsors of the message to give the appearance of coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant (i.e. fake grassroots); FAKE GRASS/FAKE SUPPORT; OPPOSITE OF GRASSROOTS; Creating the impression of public support by paying people in the public to pretend to be supportive. Bundling - A tactic in which PACs collect contributions from like-minded individuals (each limited to $2000) and present them to a candidate or political party as a “bundle,” thus increasing the PAC’s influence. Checkbook Membership- send in money to be a member A checkbook member is...
Words: 6201 - Pages: 25
...arrested by the police, they do so by: A. a. notifying by memo the judge who, if the case goes to trial, will probably preside. B. b. notifying by memo the lawyer representing the accused. C. c. filing a complaint, information, or indictment with the court. D. d. notifying the accused by letter. Answer Key: C Question 2 of 20 5.0 Points In the Supreme Court case County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, involving a defendant who argued the state took too long to effectuate a judicial determination of probable cause after his warrantless arrest, the Court held that the test for determining if there has been a "prompt" judicial determination of probable cause is whether the arrestee was brought before a judicial officer: A. a. without unreasonable delay, under all the circumstances. B. b. within 36 hours of arrest, ordinarily. C. c. within 48 hours of arrest, ordinarily. D. d. within 24 hours of arrest, ordinarily. Answer Key: C Question 3 of 20 5.0 Points Although practices vary among jurisdictions, ordinarily an indigent accused is appointed an attorney: A. a. by the police at time of arrest. B. b. by a magistrate at the first appearance. C. c. by a judge at the preliminary hearing. D. d. by a judge at trial. Answer Key: B Question 4 of 20 5.0 Points According to the Supreme Court opinion in U.S. v. Salerno, involving the detention prior to trial of defendants due to the threat they posed...
Words: 7965 - Pages: 32
...1/13/16 The Basics of the Legal System – Chapters 1 & 4 Sources of Law in the U.S 1. The Constitution * The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land * The U.S Constitution establishes the federal government and enumerates its powers * The body of the constitution * Creates the three branches of government and grants certain powers to each branch * The amendments to the constitution * Protect individual rights by putting limitations on the governments ability to act in certain ways * Amendments protect the government, not private individuals The Legislative Branch * Created by Article 1 of the Constitution * House of Representative * Senate * Responsible for the creation of new laws * Congress is generally responsible for where the money comes from and where the money is spent * All statutes start as BILLS * Bills must be passed by both the House and the Senate * Bills that pass both houses must be signed into law by the president or.. * The president can VETO the bill * If signed by the president the Bill becomes a STATUTE 2. Statues, Codes and Ordinances * Statutes are enacted by Congress and state legislatures * Ordinances are enacted by municipalities and local government agencies * Code = Codified Law = Statute The Executive Branch * Created by Article 2 of the Constitution * President * Vice President * Cabinet Members * Responsible...
Words: 17272 - Pages: 70
...01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Step 7 A Judge Is Assigned to Hear the Case ❖ 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 N 30 L In the previous two chapters, we learned about the two attorneys in the courtroom drama, the prosecutor and the defense attorney. In this chapter, we turn our attention to the third member of the courtroom work group, the judge. We will learn what judges do and how they become judges. Then, we will look at judges’ discretion and how it affects their relationships with others. INTRODUCTION Judges are by far the most easily recognized member of the courtroom work group, both by their conspicuous robes and by their prominent position in the courtroom. They are also the subject of many stereotypes because the public wants to believe that judges combine patience, wisdom, and compassion to arrive at fair decisions, while they eschew the character flaws that sometimes form the basis of decisions by others, including prejudice, intolerance, favoritism, and hostility. Unfortunately, judges are human and their decisions occasionally reflect such a reality. One West Virginia judge, for example, became so enraged at a defendant who began cursing at him in court that he jumped down from his bench, tore off his judicial robe, and bit the tip off the defendant’s nose (Smith, 1998). He served five days in jail on state assault...
Words: 21662 - Pages: 87
...(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2009 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus SKILLING v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 08–1394. Argued March 1, 2010—Decided June 24, 2010 Founded in 1985, Enron Corporation grew from its headquarters in Houston, Texas, into the seventh highest-revenue-grossing company in America. Petitioner Jeffrey Skilling, a longtime Enron officer, was Enron’s chief executive officer from February until August 2001, when he resigned. Less than four months later, Enron crashed into bankruptcy, and its stock plummeted in value. After an investigation uncovered an elaborate conspiracy to prop up Enron’s stock prices by overstating the company’s financial well-being, the Government prosecuted dozens of Enron employees who participated in the scheme. In time, the Government worked its way up the chain of command, indicting Skilling and two other top Enron executives. These three defendants, the indictment charged, engaged in a scheme to deceive investors about Enron’s true financial performance by...
Words: 40397 - Pages: 162
...Licensed to: CengageBrain User Licensed to: CengageBrain User This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions, some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. For valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest. Copyright 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Licensed to: CengageBrain User Criminal Justice in Action, 7th Edition Larry K. Gaines and Roger LeRoy Miller © 2013 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not...
Words: 20398 - Pages: 82
...The Right to Keep and Bear Arms: A Right to Self-Defense Against Criminals and Despots by Robert Dowlut[*] If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. -- James Madison[1] INTRODUCTION A written constitution is a reminder that governments can be unreasonable and unjust. By guaranteeing that "[a] well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides the citizens a means of protection against the unjust excesses of government.[2] The Framers placed this guarantee in the Bill of Rights because they considered the right to keep and bear arms peculiarly important and also uniquely vulnerable to infringement. The Amendment's command protects individuals against even popular conceptions of the public good. In addition to this protection within the United States Constitution,[3] the constitutions of forty-three states guarantee the right to keep and bear arms.[4] Despite the constitutional authority for this right, legislators and judges have consistently attempted to devalue it. Methods such as giving misleading labels to select firearms like "assault weapons"[5] or "Saturday Night Specials"[6] have been used to justify incremental disarmament.[7] American jurisprudence has deliberately devalued the right...
Words: 7782 - Pages: 32
