...there are consequences. Police work is very important. If any violations are made in the process of detaining a person and sentencing them, then there would be no case. Police officers are human which mean they can make mistakes. But, it does not mean they are allowed to disobey the law. The constitution of the United States was written in consideration of all the situations possible. The amendments are there to support the people from any corruption from the government. The purpose of this paper is to talk about the case of Brown v. Mississippi and Miranda v. Arizona. Also, to explain the effect these cases made in the police work today. In 1936, the case of Brown v. Mississippi was argued in the Supreme Court. Raymond Stewart, is a 60-year-old who was a white male (Tokarev, 2012). Stewart was discovered in the cotton seed room. Unfortunately, the people...
Words: 989 - Pages: 4
...has now charged him with assaulting an officer, assault and battery, and disorderly conduct. These are violations of DJ Codes. Andrew Madison is not guilty for these charges, because he did not do anything that was not protected by the amendments. On Wednesday, November 27, 2002, SLHS had minimum day for the approaching Thanksgiving holiday. Many students of SLHS were hanging around the building of the school and surrounding sidewalks, due to the pageant held. A few officers were patrolling their area in their car, when they noticed Andrew Madison and James/Jamie Lincoln close to SLHS on the corner of Equality Street and Hope Avenue, snacking on chips, talking loudly with each other, and Andrew was smoking cigarettes. Two officers, Officer Bates and Major came back and realized they were having a very loud conversation with a group of kids, so they suspiciously approached them. The officers asked their...
Words: 1014 - Pages: 5
...Case Brief: Salinas v. Texas Caption: Salinas v. Texas, 570 U.S. ___ (2013) Facts: Following police investigations into the 1992 shooting and killing of two brothers in their home, Salinas, the defendant, was identified as the main suspect. He voluntarily not only offered his shotgun for ballistic testing, he accompanied the police to the station for interrogation. A consensus by both parties qualified the interrogation session, which lasted for one hour as noncustodial, and did not involve assertion of Miranda warnings. The defendant answered most of the questions in the interview, but remained silent and tensed on the question on whether there would be possible matching of his shotgun and the shells at the scene of murder. During the trial,...
Words: 491 - Pages: 2
...system is greatly shaped by the civil rights safeguarded under the Bill of Rights. The court jurisprudence with regard to national security and civil liberties largely revolves around the provisions of the Bill of Rights (Baker, 2003). This paper discusses Chief Justices Earl Warren and William Rehnquist’s significant decisions and the effects they had on the balance between social order maintenance and individual liberties. Warren versus Rehnquist Courts Earl Warren held the position of Chief Justice between 1953 and 1969. He led a liberal majority, who utilized the judicial authority to consternate their conservative opponents. The Warren Court promoted the federal power, judicial power, civil liberties, and civil rights in a dramatic fashion. The Rehnquist Court, on the other hand, took a conservative approach in criminal justice (Pollak, 1979). The most significant case that the Warren Court decided with regard to civil liberties was Brown v Board of Education of Copeka, Kansas (1954). The court unanimously ruled that there is no place for the doctrine of separate but equal doctrine in the sphere of public education. The Warren Court demonstrated its value for liberalism and activism. The view of the Warren Court was that states are a hindrance in the enhancement of a just nation. In the sphere of criminal procedure and law enforcement, Chief Justice Earl Warren’s Court was associated with four chief cases: Terry v Ohio (1968), Miranda v Arizona (1966), Gideon v Wainwright...
Words: 2153 - Pages: 9
...What is the process of arrest? When someone is detained by the police, a particular arrangement of occasions takes after. The police must take after legitimate systems amid the real capture process, and at numerous different stages along the best approach to really putting a suspect in prison. When you are taken into custody you are no longer free to walk away. Your rights are given to you; the rights are intended to shield your entitlement to be free from self-implication under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These five different rights are better known as your Miranda rights. They are as followed; 1. You have the right to remain silent and to refuse to answer questions. 2. Anything you do say...
Words: 393 - Pages: 2
...Case 9 January 2014 The History of Miranda Rights Miranda Rights is a ruling, based upon a U.S. Supreme Court decision in a 1966 case, that law-enforcement officers must warn a person taken into custody that he or she has the right to remain silent and is entitled to legal counsel. (legal-dictionary.com) Miranda rules prevent a person from self-incrimination. The fifth- amendment is an amendment to the US Constitution states that no person may be compelled to testify against himself; and a person can refuse to answer a question on the grounds that it might incriminate oneself. Miranda prevents criminal investigators form violating a suspect fifth-amendment rights. A series of unfortunate events led up to the Miranda Rights being implemented into the criminal justice system. On March 2nd, 1963 a young woman reported her tape to the Phoenix, Arizona police department. She told the police that she had been driven to the desert and raped by a male unfamiliar to her. Although her polygraph test was inconclusive they arrested Ernesto Miranda. Ernesto Miranda had a prior history as a peeping tom and his car fit the description provided by the victim. Another flaw from the beginning was the victim did not identify Miranda in a line-up before he was brought into police custody and interrogated. After being interrogated for hours the police received a full confession from Ernesto Miranda. Ernesto Miranda later recanted his statement that was given to the...
Words: 1300 - Pages: 6
...Jamie Payne Ms. Davenport March 2, 2010 G Period Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Ernesto Miranda had been living a somewhat poverish life in Phoenix,Arizona in the year of 1963. A woman had been kidnapped and raped. After she reported to the police, there had been a line up and she was able to identify Mr. Miranda. He was therefore arrested, charged with the two horrendous crimes, and questioned by police for an estimate of two hours. The officers who had been questioning Miranda had failed to inform him of his 5thamendment right which had protected him against self incrimination. During his interrogation, Miranda had written his confession to kidnapping and raping the young woman. His statement had also said he was aware of his rights so of course during his trial the prosecution had used his confession to get a conviction and put him away for 20 to 30 years for each count. Ernesto had appealed his case to the Arizona Supreme Court. Heand his attorney had argued that his confession was far from valid seeing as he had not been informed of his rights and that he hadn’t had an attorney present during his questioning. The officers who questioned him had openly admitted that they did not explain Ernesto Miranda’s rights to him at any time from his arrest to his interrogation. The state had given a good argument in that Miranda had been convicted of crime in his past years so that he clearly knew his rights. Because of this the Supreme Court of Arizona had denied the appeal...
Words: 806 - Pages: 4
...May 3, 2005. The Court of Appeals found that detectives improperly interrogated Dorsey for 13 hours and didn’t give him his Miranda Warnings. Dorsey was found guilty and sentence to 14 years in prison. The conviction was overturned and the court ordered a new trial. Dorsey Fifth Amendment rights were violated according to a 5-2 ruling for the D.C. Court of Appeals. U.S. attorney office is reviewing the ruling. Prosecutors could retry this case. ANALYSIS Keith L. Alexandria of the Washington Post is correct when he wrote this article to uncover the violations the police department conducted when interrogating James Dorsey for the crime of assault against an 83 year old woman. Alexander presents a perspective that favors the defendant, when exploiting the fact that police detectives improperly interrogated Dorsey, and failed to give him his Miranda warning before questioning him about the crime. This action resulted in the violation of Dorsey’s Fifth Amendment rights, which got his conviction, overturned and ordered a new trial. Alexander makes good points when presenting the facts of Dorsey’s Fifth Amendment right violation while also informing his readers about the victim’s friend’s reaction to this violation and the implications. This article presented a lot of facts but did not mention the detectives reasoning for not giving Dorsey his Miranda warning. Further, the article did not mention if the police were going to investigate any new suspects, based on the fact...
Words: 1250 - Pages: 5
...photographic, recorded and computer generated evidence can be used in a trail are: 1. To show the scene of any incident, including the crime, 2. To demonstrate a theory as to how events occurred or might have occurred, 3. To record the behavior of a party or witness, 4. To document surveillance of an individual, 5. To record police lineups, identification procedures and the act of identification itself. 6. To record activities of those being investigated for driving under the influence, including the administration of field sobriety tests ("Rules of evidence," 2011). Miranda The requirement of Miranda is to be given to a suspect in custody before interrogation by a police officer before it can be valid (Garland, 2011). Custody results when an officer restrains a person in a manner consistent with a formal arrest, regardless of the situation or intent of the office rand the officer is required to give Miranda warnings before asking...
Words: 1005 - Pages: 5
...this decision after being so convinced that the suspects were guilty of the crime. However, because my partner interviewed the boys separately didn't videotape it and the parents were never contacted this is a major violation of the law. It was a terrible thing that happened to the victim and then I feel guilty for the family, but because of the inappropriate decisions of my coworker I had no choice but to inform the district attorney. Any parent could argue under the fourth amendment right against unreasonable search or seizure, probable cause is a necessary prerequisite to interviewing the child without parental consent. "The Supreme Court recently expanded on those rolls, however, when it decided that the police must take a person's age into account when determining whether the circumstances of the case merit a Miranda notification" (Pruett, 2011). Miranda rights for minors are different from the Miranda rights of adults. In the case J.D.B versus North Carolina, police stopped and questioned the 13-year-old seventh grade student when they saw him near the site of two home break ins. The child was also later question at the school behind to close doors with an officer and two school officials and was never told that he was allowed to leave the room, given a Miranda warning or given the option for parents to be there. After the boy was question for 30 minutes 10 minutes of the crime. After you made to the crime he was told only then that he could leave the room he did not have...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...Critical Thinking –Chapter #19 Assignment #2 7/25/2010 1. Describe a crime. Who are the parties to a criminal action? A crime is any act done by a person in violation of those duties that he or she owes to society and for the breach of which the law provides a penalty. The parties in a criminal action are the plaintiff which is the government represented by the prosecuting attorney and the defendant who is the person or business accused of the crime. 3. Describe the difference between the following classifications of crimes: felonies, misdemeanors and violations. Felonies are the most serious of crimes, usually punishable by imprisonment, whereas misdemeanors are less serious crimes that are punishable by fines or less than 1 year in prison. Violations are not felonies or misdemeanors and the penalty is usually a fine. 4. Define Actus Reus? Define Mens Rea. What is a non-intent crime? Give an example. Actus Reus- guilty act Mens Rea- state of mind, evil intent A non-intent crime is a crime that imposes criminal liability without finding intent or mens rea. A death of a pedestrian due to a person’s reckless driving would be considered a non-intent crime. They could be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to prison. 5. What is the difference between criminal and civil law? What is the jury vote required for each? What is the standard of proof for each? Civil Law- Action is brought by a Plaintiff, trial by jury, except in actions...
Words: 1089 - Pages: 5
...individuals when proof of their guilt becomes more apparent with every attorney client meeting. It takes a special person to defend an individual whose guilt is probable, but still following the law and all the details regarding the justice system, and this scenario happens many times with legal representation. Reading of the Miranda rights is an important part of the law, and these rights must be read to an individual that is in the presence of police officials, prior to any questioning. Defendants have the right to a lawyer present upon interrogation, and if this right was not offered to an individual, then this is a violation of rights (Larson, 2000). The police also received a confession of guilt, but the confession was allegedly coerced. Any information received during the interrogation should not legally be used against the individual, especially because legal representation was absent. If this were my client, I would feel a lack of respect, but I would still have to defend this person to the fullest extent of my ability. I would overlook my dislike for my client, and I would take full advantage of the lack of Miranda Rights read. This type of defense has been used to throw out confessions in the past, and I would use this mistake by the police department as a positive for the client. Regardless, if I suspected innocence by the client in this scenario, I would do nothing different in my representation of the client. I would still try to get the confession...
Words: 327 - Pages: 2
...DESCRIBE INSTANCES WHEN THE MIRANDA WARNINGS ARE NOT REQUIRED. The Miranda warning is part of a criminal procedure rule that law enforcement is required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of his or her Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. Generally, no Miranda warning is required if the suspect is not held in custody for criminal-investigative purposes. A citizen not in custody who is asked potentially incriminating questions by a police officer must claim the benefit of the Fifth Amendment instead of answering if he wishes to retain his privilege. For example, at a traffic stop, Miranda warning is not required unless the suspect is taken into custody. When arrested and you invoke your right to counsel before making several statements, the statements then are considered volunteered because they were spontaneous and not made during an interrogation. Also, a prison inmate is not in custody for Miranda purposes because his freedom of movement is not restricted more than it would normally be in the prison environment. In Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court held that the admission of an elicited incriminating statement by a suspect not informed of these rights violates the Fifth and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. If placed “in custody” for purposes of receiving Miranda protection, there must be either a “formal arrest, or restraint on freedom of...
Words: 1205 - Pages: 5
...traced back to 1868 thanks to the fourteenth amendment being ratified that year. What is vital to know about the fourth teen amendment is this "No state shall deprive any person life of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (Wilson, 2009, p. 33). When I think of due process the first think that comes to my mind is being arrested. During my research on the topic I found some very interesting information in regards to the due process. I found information that states the term due process is much older than 1868. According to Barnabas D. Johnson "The phrase "due process of law" originated in a 1355 restatement of the 1215 Magna Carta, by which for the first time in history (at least in relation to the rights of ordinary people) "the government" — in this case, King John of England — was brought "under the law" ... that is, became subject to something called "the law of the land" which he was not empowered to alter in its fundamental character. This is the origin of the concept of "government under law" as distinct from merely "government by laws";" (Johnson, 2005) I found that information to be unique because more people like myself think of that term coming from the 1868, in fact that term is much older than. Explain how due process protects the accused against abuses by the federal government. The due process protects us in several ways against abuse by the government creating several clauses...
Words: 668 - Pages: 3
...rule. In this analysis, it will state the costs and benefits of the exclusionary rule, as well as alternative remedies to the rule. The author will state their position on the exclusionary rule and provide support for their position. The author will also include support from two peer reviewed sources. The Fourth Amendment to The Constitution of the United States reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized." (The Exclusionary Rule. (n.d.). Retrieved May 24, 2015) the exclusionary rule prevents government from using evidence that is retrieved in violation of the United States Constitution. This rule was made as a deterrent to law enforcement to prevent further unlawful searches and seizure from continuing to happen. The exclusionary rule was created for court purposes it is not an independent constitutional right. The exclusionary rule goes hand in hand with the Fourth Amendment. With every rule there are also exceptions. The following exceptions apply to the exclusionary rule, good faith exception, independent source doctrine, inevitable source doctrine, attenuation doctrine, evidence admissible for impeachment, qualified immunity, and fruit of the poisonous tree. The good faith exception...
Words: 864 - Pages: 4
