Procedural Rights In The Criminal Justice System

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Pheonix, Arizona for the kidnapping and raping of a woman. When questioned by police officers, Miranda would eventually give a confession, and sign it, which wasn 't the case.. Before the court, this confession would be used against Miranda, and with it, the implication that it was received voluntarily and with the convicted knowing his rights. Miranda was convicted with a 20-30 year sentence. Upon eventually learning that his confession was obtained unlawfully, Miranda would appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking for an overturn, and when that fell through, would turn to the United States Supreme Court, filing a habeas corpus.

He got in touch to a very distinguished Arizona trial lawyer John J. Flynn, who decided to take over the case with the assistance of John P. Frank, they appealed to the United States Supreme Court. On the behalf of Miranda, Frank wrote, “The day is here to recognize the full meaning of the sixth amendment.” (Frank). The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of a suspect to a lawyer. In addition to the Fifth Amendment protects defendants from being forced to incriminate themselves.

Anyone who has been arrested before should know their rights therefore no matter what that person had done they are required to read you your rights as you are arrested. But who created the Miranda rights? The Miranda rights were first created by the Supreme Court after a man named Ernesto Miranda was convicted of his crime without his rights read to him. This case Ernesto, he was convicted of kidnapping and raping an eighteen year old ill woman. I disagree with this because of his past crimes along with his new crimes.

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights, and it guarantees certain rights to individuals accused of crimes. These rights include the right to a speedy trial, the right to a public trial, the right to an impartial jury, the right to be informed of the

The reason each of those amendments was brought up was to show that the Constitution was the first step to individual rights. However, as you may have noticed before the Miranda decision, the Constitution covered many rights of those accused. Those rights were mainly used inside the courtroom; not when the individual’s were being arrested and interrogated. This then led to police abuse in interrogating situations; the suspects then felt that they had to say anything just to make the law enforcement officials feel like they are being compliant (Sonneborn, 2004) This then would often lead to false confessions.

"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 warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized". The 4th amendment was made based on the Founding Fathers experience with the Kings agents and the all purpose rit of assistances that they used abusively. Without the 4th amendment, we would be at the will of the police because they could come into our household, search anything and take whatever they want. "A reasonable expatiation of privacy" the 4th amendment secures the protection of the people

For example, in the case Miranda v. Arizona, Ernesto Miranda was arrested and the officer did not read him his rights, like the right to remain silent. As a result, he eventually produced a written and signed confession to the crime. This case expanded our 5th and 6th

The exclusionary rule is a deterrent against searches and seizures. Any evidence that is gained through an illegal search or seizure is now inadmissible in criminal proceedings, per the exclusionary rule. Supporters of the exclusionary rule argue that it helps prevent illegal searches and seizures against law enforcement. Those against the exclusionary rule argue that the exclusionary rule keeps criminals out of jail and there are other preventative measures such as suspending police officers without pay, dismissing them from a case, or in extreme circumstances terminating employment of officers who violate the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects all citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures from all government officials.

This Amendment provides protections from unfair methods of prosecution and investigation which is therefore illegal according to the Sixth Amendment. Some of these rights however were given to English citizens and

The Sixth Amendment right states that a Criminal Defendant, Miranda, has the right to a public trial with unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury,

The book describes the Miranda Rights, which are the legal rights that a person under arrest must be informed before they are interrogated by police. If the arresting officer doesn’t inform an arrested person of his Miranda Rights, that person may walk free from any chargers. The book also talks about double jeopardy, double jeopardy is the right that prohibits a person from been tried twice for the same crime. In other words if a person is found innocent and sometime later new evidence surface that can incriminate him with the crime that he is “innocent” he cannot be charged for that same crime. The book also mentions self-incrimination, which is the right that no citizen will have to be a witness against himself.

Abstract Miranda v. Arizona took place in 1996. The case involves a Hispanic man named, Ernesto Miranda and the state of New York. Miranda is being charged with rape and kidnapping. He was held in interrogation for a lengthy amount of time until he eventually confessed. He was found guilty and the conviction was approved by the supreme court because he did not request a lawyer.

"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 warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized". The 4th amendment was made based on the Founding Fathers ' experience with the Kings agents and the all purpose writ of assistances that they used abusively. Without the 4th amendment, we would be at the mercy of the police because they could come into our household, search anything and take whatever they want. "A reasonable expatiation of privacy" the 4th amendment secures the protection of the

6th Amendment I personally find that out of all the amendments the most important one is the 6th amendment. Reason being that it is crucial in aiding the judicial process from wrongly persecuting innocent people and it allows our democratic process to continue without preventing innocent people for taking the fall while punishing those who harm it. It keeps justice in check, keeping laws in line and rulings to be fair. The 6th amendment helps the defendants have an attorney when they are unable to afford one.

In the formal criminal justice process, there are important decision makers that decide whether to keep the offender in the system or dismiss the suspect with no future consequences. Suppose a law was set in place