On appeal, Terry argued that the conviction should be thrown out because the search that produced the evidence of the weapon in his possession was improper because it was an impermissible search of his person without a warrant or probable cause as required by the 4th Amendment (Schmalleger, 2009).
The Supreme Court decided that the type of search the police officer conducted was not prohibited by the 4th Amendment. Instead, it was a reasonable and appropriate means of ensuring the safety of the officer from concealed weapons in a tactical situation in which that concern was appropriate in light of the totality of the circumstances in which it occurred. While the 4th Amendment does prohibit more invasive searches with the intention of finding evidence of crimes, (such as for concealed contraband or of small containers), it does not prelude an external frisk now known as a Terry frisk or Terry stop, in which the police simply ensure their safety by identifying armed individuals in suspicious circumstances (Schmalleger, 2009).
In Miranda, the defendant was arrested on suspicion of rape and he was subjected to the custodial interrogation techniques that were typical of the era. He was deprived of comforts such as sleep, water, food, and a sanitary bathroom facility. He was interrogated aggressively until he produced a confession to the crime, on the basis of which he was convicted of rape. On appeal to the Supreme Court, the decision was reversed on the basis of the improper questioning and the deprivation of the defendant's opportunity to consult counsel before answering any interrogation questions. Miranda generated a series of specific obligations on the part of law enforcement personnel in connection with interrogating persons under arrest or in custodial custody (Zalman, 2008). While those changes are often referred to as "Miranda rights," they are actually not rights; they are rules with which police must comply to prevent confessions and other testimony elicited improperly from being excluded from the evidence available to the prosecution to introduce at trial (Hendrie, 1997).
In that regard, the Miranda rules require that, if evidence of confession is to be admissible, the accused must have been advised of the right to remain silent before custodial questioning; the accused must have been advised...
If the defendant is indicted, then a trial may follow. The Fifth Amendment also includes a prohibition on double jeopardy -- being tried for the same crime twice. Due process is another element of the Fifth Amendment, and guarantees that all legal rights must be upheld in the process of a trial. A person may not be treated unfairly relative to others with respect to his or her trial.
School Policy Involving Students' 4th Amendment Rights Some of the nation's public schools are beginning to resemble medieval fortresses with armed guards stationed at entrances equipped with metal detectors. Although these steps have helped to prevent the introduction of weapons onto school grounds, more problematic are other types of contraband that inevitably find their way into the nation's schools, including tobacco, alcohol and drugs of all types, as well as
Miranda Issues in Law Enforcement In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the landmark case of Ernesto Miranda, who had been arrested by Arizona police on suspicion of rape. The suspect confessed to the crime after two hours of questioning by police while in their custody, without ever having been advised of his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination or his 6th Amendment right to legal representation before such questioning. Ever since the Miranda
The student journalists sued, citing the Tinker standard (Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988). The issue in this case, while similar to those of Tinker and Fraser, differed in that the question was not about "obviously inappropriate" language, or about viewpoint discrimination. Instead, the issue was whether a school official had the right to censor school-sponsored publications if they believe the material is inappropriate for some students, or that the
Police Officer Murder Death Penalty Scenario The case of 20-year-old Jesse James, who was recently arrested for the alleged murder of a police officer, is one which is sure to arouse the public's sense of righteous indignation, with friends, family and fellow cops demanding that James be tried, convicted and executed for his crimes. As a newly elected prosecutor charged with the unenviable task of handling this contentious case, it is
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now