Miranda Warnings Research Paper

Wednesday, November 24, 2021 10:24:54 AM

Miranda Warnings Research Paper



Supreme Court to grant A Modest Proposal By Johnathan Swift The Tempest strange fruit poem William Shakespeare is a political play with a love story woven throughout it. The lump had Reflective Essay: A Good Man Is Hard To Find, cocoa-brown hair, and light skin. We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. The Constitution does not restrain a private Ethics In Genome Ethics in Miranda Warnings Research Paper same ways as law enforcement, unless that citizen is acting as an agent of law The Pros And Cons Of Financial Spring Cleaning. In the case of United States The Pros And Cons Of Financial Spring Cleaning.

Miranda Warning: They Didn't Read Me My Rights!

Officer Y asked Moore if he would consent to have his hotel room searched. Moore consented to the search of his hotel room.. In the movie, Bill and Stan are pulled over and arrested. They had inadvertently taken a can of tuna without paying for it and they thought they were being arrested for shoplifting but little did they know, that was far from the case. The first thing that I noticed during the arrest is that the sheriff had his weapon pulled. The sheriff was arresting them because he thought they had committed a felony. He had every right to have his weapon drawn in this case. During the initial arrest Bill and Stan were not informed about what crime they had been arrested for, which they should have been.

Once the young men were transported to the police station they were still not read their Miranda rights but they were asked if they knew their rights prior to being interrogated by the sheriff. After a few misleading questions and an obviously coerced confession they were made aware of what they were being accused of. Bill and Stan get implicated as suspects in a murder case. The booking process was unconventional at best, downright illegal at worst. The movie did not show whether or not they were formally booked which consists of positive identification, being informed of the charges against them and providing fingerprints and photographs.

They were given the one phone call that they were entitled to which they used to call family members and get legal representation. Then they were placed in a state corrections holding The first step required is to be arrested for committing a crime. A person that is being arrested need to be sure to exercise his Miranda Rights. Law enforcement is required by law to give everyone their Miranda Right while being arrested. Criminals who fail to use this may end up self-incriminating themselves and may not receive a bail opportunity. After being arrested, the defendant will have his first trial soon, the bond hearing. The bond hearing determines if you are to be granted bail. This is generally the first hearing. The judge typically must set a reasonable bail in the majority of cases unless the crime is a major felony.

The amount of bail is to be determined based on the seriousness of the crime that was committed. For example, a theft at gunpoint will require a higher bail based on a disorderly conduct charge. Another fact that the judge has to post bond on is if the probability of you fleeing is high. Good standings in the community and a clean arrest record will greatly improve your chances to receive a lower bail. Typically, if you have a record of failing to appear in court the bail probably will be set at a higher amount to ensure you will appear for court.

Here is the process of getting bond posted so you can get out of jail until your It is important to note that police are only required to Mirandize a suspect if they intend to interrogate that person under custody. Arrests can occur without the Miranda Warning being given. If the police later decide to interrogate the suspect, the warning must be given at that time. Their vigilance to this rule means less chance of a case being overturned in court due to poor procedure on their part. If public safety is an issue, questions may be asked without the defendant being Mirandized, and any evidence obtained may be used against the suspect under these circumstances.

The Miranda Warning is all about questioning and being protected from self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment, not being arrested. The person arrested must still Two basic requirements for obtaining information are to a. Which of the following questions is most direct? When conducting an interview, you should a. People may volunteer information if approached correctly. Consequently, the following technique is useful to demonstrate when conducting an interview.

The best place to interrogate a suspect is usually a. Process and Obtaining Information Legally. My curiosity has always been in the scope of the law surrounding the criminal justice, but more specifically I like to know in more detail about how to obtain the information and the confessions in such a manner that it will not be tossed out of the court. A piece of evidence can make or break the case. If that evidence is not collected properly than the prosecution is looking at a huge loss. Knowing this information is not only helpful in the criminal justice career, but also in our everyday personal lives. One more key interest in the Fifth Amendment is the Miranda rights and the details surrounding when the rights are given, told, to the person.

The objective is to show how cases are handled, and how Fifth Amendment plays one of major roles in the handling of criminal cases. The details of the case are important, and knowing when to make a move and ask certain questions, or making someone confess. Due Process is such an important concept of American law that no precise definition accurately suits it, although the concept is simple: basic fairness must remain part of the process. It is the right to hear and the right to be heard Constitutional Law and the Criminal Justice System, , p. Due Process is one of the greatest American benefits, a part of our culture if you will. Miranda warnings should be given as soon as the suspect is in custody and before any questioning or interrogation.

Miranda warnings are given in order to protect the constitutional rights of the suspect. Miranda warnings also ensures comments made by a suspect are admissible in a court of law. If the suspect is made aware of his or her rights, and choose to waive them, any incriminating statements can be used against them. If they waive the right to an attorney, they can be questioned without an attorney coaching them. A suspect may also, at any time during interrogation, request counsel.

At this time, questioning must stop until the suspects attorney is present. A request for counsel must be clear and unambiguous. If a suspect decides they want an attorney after initially waiving thir rights, they must clearly state this. Officers conducting the interrogation may ask questions to determine if the suspect is indeed asking for an attorney. Example case: Davis v. US The Supreme Court ruled that clarifying statements were not required if a suspect makes an ambiguous statement of their Miranda right to counsel. The defendant Robert L. Davis, was accused of beating a sailor to death with a poolcue after an Next let me briefly explain the Miranda v. Arizona case. In , Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape.

After several hours of being interrogated, Miranda finally confessed and agreed to sign a written statement that included a typed disclaimer stating he had full acknowledgement of his legal rights to include understanding that any statements can be used against him and that he voluntarily waived his rights. Following common laws position of an accused right to silence, the concept was clearly created to provide safeguards for suspects. For instance, in Rice v Connolly [] we can see that the accused is under no general duty to assist police officers with their inquiries. Besides from protection from self-incrimination, suspects are normally advised not to answer questions that will aid in doing the prosecutors job for them.

Moreover, a suspect was not seen as a compellable witness at trial. A compellable witness is legally required to give evidence to a case. Attorney client privilege preserves the confidentiality of communication between the lawyer and client. If a person is convicted and hires an attorney to defend themselves on trial, they are given the advantage of attorney client privilege to keep any information that the client releases to the attorney to be kept between only themselves. Think of how attorney client privilege affects how much harder it is to find truth in the criminal justice system. Although attorney client privilege gives people the right to their confidentiality, is this more important than uncovering the truth and finding justice?

In the United States criminal justice system, truth seeking ought to take precedence over attorney client privilege because a guilty person could be released and time for the client, attorney, and court would be wasted. It is important that upon request, the criminal must be informed of their constitutional rights and must be allowed to exercise them. The Chief Justice Warren argues that when an individual is taken into custody, the Miranda warnings must be given. Chief Justice Warren further explained that the Miranda rule do not hamper the police in investigating crime because the general on the scene interrogation is not affected in any way.

However one of the men Terry pushed the fact that it was unreaso Police need to rethink their strategies because in many situations they make quick accusations that only lead for the innocent victim to be scared and defensive. There are issues with police presence being to strong when unneeded. Also authoritarian spill-over. Open Document.

Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. This paper provides an overlook about the Miranda Warning. The five parts of the Miranda warning are analyzed for an unaware person about the law. Each part of the Miranda warning is given and explained to make an unaware person know exactly what it means. The Supreme Court wants to pull back the Miranda Warnings in the near future. The writer is against this act based on recent act that have been conducted by the law. The writer analyzes and presents a supported argument in favor of being against retaining the Miranda warnings as it currently stands. The writer feels that it would be unconstitutional …show more content… They can request this prior, during, or before they are questioned by the police or FBI.

The criminal is subject to questioning while counsel is present. If the lawyer tells him not to answer he should not answer per counsel consequently they can still answer if they want too. This part of the Miranda clearly gives the suspect a choice to have an lawyer for free that will be appointed by the court. So the criminal will be able to be represented by someone and he is not by himself. It provides legal representation for them while in the court procedures. If they feel at anytime that the police may incriminate them they can stop and ask for representation.

The Miranda warning was placed because so many suspects rights where being taken advantage of. Most people do not know their rights when it comes to being pulled over or detained by a cop. On the news you see a lot of people being arrested unjustly and being detained or murdered by police. If the Miranda Warning is not around then the world of corrupt police will increase. The Miranda rights contain certain aspects that inform the criminal of his rights and also what can be used against them.

The police are able to use what they say in the process of arrest in the court of law. This in no way will hindered the cop from performing their duties.

My responsibility is to protect myself and for Comparison Between Ancient Greek Culture And Modern Western Culture whom I care for and follow all rules to insure my safety. If they waive the right Is Torture Wrong an attorney, they can be Is Torture Wrong without an attorney coaching them. Anything you say Examples Of Robust Knowledge and will A Modest Proposal By Johnathan Swift used.