S. Supreme ourt).
Following this case, police departments were now required to inform every arrested person of their rights under the law, now called a "Miranda Warning." Many conservatives believed that it was unfair and unnecessary to inform suspects of their rights, rights they should know if an American itizen. Even President Richard Nixon believed that Miranda made it easier on criminals and harder on police. This view held that the rule would increase crime, and caused Nixon to state that he would appoint Judges who were "strict constructionists," and who would exercise judicial restraint (Burgen, 2006). There are three exceptions to the Miranda rule, though:

The routine booking question -- police may ask standard booking questions without needing Miranda.

Police hostage negotiations are not interrogations and therefore exempt.

The jailhouse informant exception or a secretly taped meeting between a suspect and police office in which the suspect attended voluntarily are not subject to…...

mla

Cited in:

 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=U.S.&vol=384&invol=436 

Vanmeter, L.A. (2006). Miranda V. Arizona -- Great Supreme Court Decisions. Chelsea House.

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 ruling, police have been required to advise suspects in their custody that they have four specific rights before interrogating them. Failure to comply with the Miranda requirements constitutes grounds for excluding any confessions in response to police interrogation. According to Miranda, custodial suspects must be advised that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say can be used against them in court, and that they have the right to legal representation prior to questioning, at no cost,…...

mla

References

California State University From the Incident Through the System Legally: Knowledge Base of Legal Concepts. (1999) Accessed March 11, 2004 at http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/criminal.justice/standard.htm

Dershowitz, A. (2002) Why Terrorism Works

New Haven: Yale University Press.

Dershowitz, A. (2002) Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age

Case Facts: Ernesto Miranda was arrested and locked up in a Phoenix police station on March 13, 1963 where he was identified by a complaining witness (Samaha, 2012). Law enforcement officers took him to an Investigation Room where he was questioned before the two officers came out with a written confession that he signed. During the questioning, Miranda was not notified that he had a right to an attorney and was notified of the need for voluntary confession after making his oral confession. The written confession was then admitted into evidence at his trial before a jury despite objections from the defense counsel. The court then found him guilty of kidnapping and rape and sentenced him to 20 to 30 years in prison for each count, with these sentences running simultaneously. This ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court of Arizona following Mirandas appeal on the basis that his constitutional…...

Miranda ule's effectiveness in America today [...] why the Miranda is well tailored to guard against constitutional violations, and will present an argument for the Miranda rule. The Miranda ule, first adopted in 1966, is still a contentious ruling in today's criminal justice system. While some critics of the rule feel it is not a deterrent to coercion of information from a suspect, most experts believe the Miranda ule was created with a solid foundation to help ensure a suspect's rights are not violated and the information from any suspect is admissible in court. The Miranda ule guards the criminal justice system just as well as it guards against rights violations and because of this, it is vital to the quick and efficient trying of cases. The Miranda ule is controversial, but it is a necessity in modern policing, and it helps both the suspect and the police.
The Miranda…...

mla

References

Author not Available. "The Miranda Rule." FindLaw.com. 2002. 6 Dec. 2003.  http://cobrands.public.findlaw.com/newcontent/flg/ch14/st3/mc1.html 

Bradley, Craig M. The Failure of the Criminal Procedure Revolution. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993.

Carrillo, Silvio. "Do Miranda Rights Create a Loophole for Criminals?" SpeakOut.com. 3 Feb. 2000. 6 Dec. 2003.  http://speakout.com/activism/issue_briefs/1148b-1.html 

Godsey, Mark A. "Miranda's final frontier, the international arena: a critical analysis of United States v. Bin Laden, and a proposal for a new Miranda exception abroad." Duke Law Journal 51.6 (2002): 1703+.

Criminal Justice & Criminology
Has the Miranda vs. Arizona ruling decreased the percentage of arresting official violations of defendant Fifth Amendment rights?

(ian)

CJ327W esearch Methods in Criminal Justice

The Miranda vs. Arizona ruling has attracted notable attention to the treatment of the accused in the hands of the law. Specifically, the ruling affirmed the rights to the accused under the law and to the legal rights of the accused. The research was to reveal the degree of law enforcement lack of enforcing the Miranda rights to the accused. A questionnaire presented to four group types that have a stakeholder interest in the law enforcement and legal rights aspect of the case was distributed to determine the activity relevant to Miranda enforcement process. The findings are expected to reveal abuse within the system and a notable increase in the Miranda violations for the accused.

Purpose & Audience

The Miranda vs. Arizona (III, G.C.T., 2000) decision…...

mla

References

Allen, H. (1967). Miranda v. arizona: Is it being applied? Criminal Law Bulletin, 3(3), 135-1441. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/55778946?accountid=13044

A, M.N. (1971). The court and local law enforcement: The impact of miranda Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/55776023?accountid=13044

Brazier, Alex. "The people on the bus get searched and seized: why police conduct in suspicionless bus sweeps should be circumscribed." George Washington Law Review 78.4 (2010): 908-941. Criminal Justice Collection. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.

H, A.S. (1971). Police authority and the rights of the individual Arc Books. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/55779413?accountid=13044

The fact that Fred was eventually allowed to leave is less important in that determination than Fred's state of mind and reasonable belief about whether or not he was still free to leave once the police informed him that he was actually a suspect in Wilma's murder (Dershowitz, 2002; Zalman, 2008).
Search and Seizure and Unlawful Arrest Issues:

The fact pattern does not make clear whether or not the police actually conducted a search of Fred's home or were merely "bluffing" to induce cooperation from Fred. Assuming that no such unwarranted search was actually being conducted, there was no impermissible search and seizure of Fred's home. Provided Fred still (reasonably) believed that he was free to terminate the interview and leave when he volunteered the confession, that evidence should not be excluded under Miranda (and related) doctrine and principles.

However, the police did seize Fred's vehicle, which was an impermissible violation of…...

mla

References

Dershowitz, A. (2002). Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age. New York:

Bantam Books.

Friedman, A. (2005). A History of American Law. New York: Touchstone.

Schmalleger, F. (2008). Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the 21st

Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1040 (1983)) since the independence of a state court's state-law judgment is not clear.
Furthermore the Court stated that the Florida Supreme Court treated state and federal law as interchangeable and interwoven and therefore would give jurisdiction to the U.S. Supreme Court based on a ruling made in the Michigan v. Long case.

he most weight was obviously put on the wording used and how it can be interpreted and how it was interpreted. Since there are grammatical differences between "before" and "during," the decision cannot be upheld. It is clear that if the interrogator used the phrase: ".. An attorney will be presented to you before questioning" it is not the same as if it would read: ".. And attorney will be presented to you before and during questioning." his is misleading and can be interpreted as if the defendant would have the right to talk…...

mla

Thomson Reuters . (2009). "Miranda" Rights and the Fifth Amendment. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Criminal Law: Your Rights:  http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/criminal_rights/your-rights-miranda/miranda.html 

U.S. Constitution. (1789, March 4). Bill of Right. Retrieved April 29, 2010, from U.S. Constitution:  http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html 

Wikipedia.org. (n.d.). United States Declaration of Independence. Retrieved April 29, 2010, from United States Declaration of Independence:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

Moose Horn Police officers admissible at trial, since no Miranda warnings were given to the defendant at any time?
In the case of Sleazy vs. The state of decency the statements made by the defendant were not admissible in court because the officers did not inform Sleazy of his Miranda rights. These rights should have been stated to the defendant when it was obvious to the police officers that section 54321 of the law had been violated.

Instead the officers continued to ask Sleazy questions that they knew would incriminate him. This violated his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself; the amendment is a fundamental part of the American justice system and was not adhered to in this case. Therefore the statements made by Sleazy were not admissible in court.

In neglecting to read Sleazy his rights the officers were forfeiting all of the information that Sleazy was providing because he…...

mla

Works Cited

Interpreting the Cross-Section Requirement of the Sixth Amendment http://law.wustl.edu/Journal/52/435.pdf

All cases cited came at  http://www.uscaselaw.com

The idea of remaining silent when faced with accusation has historical religious and legal roots. Moses teachings', transformed to written form by the ancient Talmudic law had a complete ban on self-incrimination. The self-incrimination law could not be changed because it was viewed to contravene the natural instinct for survival. The ancient common law rule also had it that confusions must be voluntary. When the right to remain silent was included in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. constitution, it was tied to a complicated and controversial history. The Supreme Court has applied three tenets in the constitution to evolve rules that govern police interrogation and the confession process. These three include the Sixth Amendment on the Right to Counsel, the Fourteenth Amendment clause on due process and the Fifth Amendment on Self-incrimination clauses. Each of these provisions has led the police to handle interrogation and confessions in varying ways…...

They also had the power to decide the merits of evidence and arguments. In the 19th century, judges gained greater control over juries and the role of juries became what it is currently; hearing evidence presented on both sides and determining the guilt or innocence of the accused.
The advantages of the jury system lie in the foundational elements articulated and supported by amendments and the Supreme Court. The Sixth Amendment provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial" (Landsman & Hastings 1992). A speedy trial was emphasized to avoid the accused languishing in prison for extended periods of time prior to a trial, or have the accused fate put off for an indeterminate amount of time. Further, the Sixth Amendment guarantees every citizens right to an impartial jury. The intent is that the prospective juries not enter into the…...

mla

Bibliography

Ackerman, B. (1993). Neo-federalism? Constitutionalism and Democracy, Cambridge:

Allan, T. (2001). Constitutional justice: A liberal theory of the rule of law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Decent, E. (2010). Democratizing common law constitutionalism, McGill Law Journal, 55(3), 511-535.

Hogue, A. (1986). Origins of the common law. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.

Some of these methods include plea agreements and the disclosure of incriminating evidence, along with witness testimony. Thus, defendants' rights do not tie the hands of officers and the courts because officers and the courts have an arsenal of ways to manage these rights and still perform their jobs.
While the myriad of rights offered to defendants in the United States may sometimes seem like ways to protect the guilty and harm the innocent, this is far from the case. Not only are these rights necessary for protecting the defendant, along with the rest of the democratic society of the United States, but the rights can also be managed through a plethora of legal tactics on the part of the courts and police officers. Established through the Constitution and landmark court cases, primarily, defendants' rights honor the intent of the constitution. Though it is true that some guilty defendants may…...

mla

References

Cima, Greg. (2006, 21 November). Marijuana charges dropped because of illegal search.

The Pantagraph. Retrieved at http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2006/11/21/news/doc4563de8080933076324107.txt

Edgar, Timothy H. Interested Persons Memo. Retrieved November 23, 2008, at  http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/17203leg20030214.html 

Farrell, Nick (2008, 20 November). Copper stole my Xbox. The Inquirer. Retrieved at  http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/11/20/copper-stole-xbox

They are occasionally informed too poorly to make an opinion, or are simply uninterested in some aspects of politics. Public opinion used to be measured through voting, letter writing, and demonstrating. However, those who write letter and demonstrate generally have views that are more extreme than those of the public (166-168). Thus, the public opinion poll was introduced. Examples of public opinion polling include President Barack Obama's approval rating, which is currently 68%, and the 72% that believe the U.S. will be "better off in four years" (Gallup). Public opinion polls are important because they "keep the public well informed," as well as keeping the public in touch with important shifts in public opinion" ("Are opinion polls useful?").
Using a random sampling method, the public opinion poll uses probability to reflect the views of the public. That is, by using a random selection of the population, the opinions of the…...

mla

Works Cited

Faxed Test.

Are Opinion Polls Useful?" American Historical Association. 25 January 2008. http://www.historians.org/projects/GIRoundtable/Polls/Polls5.htm

Gallup. "Obama Starts with 68% Job Approval." Gallup. 24 Jauary 2008. 25 January 2008.  http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx

Policing History
1823- Stephen F. Austin known as the "Father of Texas" receives permission from the Mexican Government to employ ten men to protect the new Texas frontier. This marks the beginning of the long storied and infamous Texas angers. This is significant because it the initiation of one of the first law, and order enforcement agencies in the history of America.

1845- New York, this date and location is widely accepted as the beginning of paid, professional policing in America. William Frederick Havemeyer was the appointed mayor of the city during this time period. At his proposal, The New York State Legislature approved a proposal to organize and created the NYPD. This is significant because it marked the beginning of an institution that has been emulated and followed by other major cities across America. These cities followed and expanded New York's model of policing.

1902- Fingerprinting is first used in the…...

mla

References

Gaines, Larry K., Victor E. Kappeler, and Karen S. Miller-Potter. Policing in America. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Pub., 2003. Print.

"History of FBI | View Timeline." Xtimeline - Explore and Create Free Timelines. Web. 05 Feb. 2011. .

Terry vs. Ohio
Terry Vs Ohio

The issue of what constitutes a violation of the fourth amendment forms the basis of the argument in the case of Terry vs. Ohio. In this case the petitioner Terry was stopped and frisked by the officer on the streets. A brief description of the situation is as follows. Detective McFadden was walking his beat when he observed two individuals who in his opinion were "casing" the joint with the intention of robbing the place in the daylight hours. This opinion was based on his observation and years of experience (Terry v. Ohio 2012). The suspects moved away from the initial area and were kept under surveillance by the detective. When the men joined a third person a few blocks away the officer identified himself as a police officer, requested the men's names and proceeded to pat down the outside of the men's clothing. The officer…...

mla

References

Saltzburg, S.A. (1998). Terry V. Ohio: A Practically perfect doctrine. St. John's Law Review. 3

72: 911-976.

Terry v. Ohio (2012). Retrieved from  http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-keyed-to-israel/arrest-search-and-seizure/terry-v-ohio-2/ 

Terry v. Ohio (2012). Retrieved from  http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZS.html

Supreme Court Chief Justices Warren and ehnquist
Compare and contrast approaches to criminal procedures by U.S. Supreme Courts:

The Warren vs. The ehnquist Court

A common philosophical debate within the legal community is when the approach advocated by so-called 'conservative' justices (often called strict constructionism) is pitted against more 'liberal' and freer interpretations of constitutional words and history. Throughout much of the 20th century, it was often said that the more liberal interpreters of the Constitution were 'winning the war' in regards to this issue, thanks to the presiding intelligence of Chief Justice Earl Warren. "Following his appointment in 1953 Chief Justice Earl Warren led the Court into a series of decisions that drastically affected sexual freedom, the rights of criminals, the practice of religion, civil rights, and the structure of political representation. The decisions of the Warren Court reflected its deep concern for the individual, no matter how lowly" (Some major…...

mla

References

Byellin, J. (2013). John G. Roberts: Conservative yet apolitical consensus building chief justice.

Legal Solutions. Retrieved from:

 http://blog.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/top-legal-news/john-g-roberts-conservative-yet-apolitical-consensus-building-chief-justice/ 

Liptak, A. (2012). Supreme Court upholds healthcare law 5-4, in a victory for Obama.