Preview

Escobedo Vs Illinois Case Study

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
120 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Escobedo Vs Illinois Case Study
The Supreme Court, in Escobedo v. Illinois, ruled in favor of Danny Escobedo. The Supreme Court explained that the interrogation process that Escobedo was placed under was biased and subjective. The verdict explained that the police department targeted Escobedo like he was the murderer and not as a suspect or a witness to the incident.
Escobedo was treated like a guilty man; he was not awarded his rights protected under the 5th and 6th Amendments to the United States Constitution. These amendments require that people arrested are made aware of their right to talk to Illinois lawyers and their right to be tried for the suspected crimes. Escobedo was not awarded these rights when he was questioned for the crime.
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Heien V. North Carolina Case Study
    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Heien V. North Carolina Case Study

    North Carolina and Valdez situations was that the specific traffic violations, because Heien vehicle was stopped, because of a broken tail light. In contrast, Valdez was stop, because of an air freshener hanging from the inside rear view mirror. The intent of the traffic stop was different, in Heien’s case the officer conducted the situation in professional manner with no harmful intent. Yet, in Valdez case the officer had personal history with the occupants and he had a personal vendetta against Camilo Valdez identical brother Juan Valdez so the traffic stop was based on personal intent. In Heien v. North Carolina Heien was the owner of the vehicle, yet in Camilo Valdez case he was not the owner of the vehicle. Heien agreed to have his car search when the officer ask him permission. In contrast, Juan Valdez did not consent to have the vehicle searched by Michael Holden. In Heien case there was no appellate court cases that address the legality of this type of traffic violation. Yet, in Valdez situation there was an appellate court case that did set precedent and address that it’s not a traffic violation to have an air freshener hanging on the rearview mirror. These differences may seem minuscule but it does change the whole nature of the…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ecobedo Vs. Illinois Case Study
    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Ecobedo Vs. Illinois Case Study

    The case of Escobedo V. Illinois set the precedent for the sixth amendment, which is the right to a counsel. It guaranteed that if a person is arrested then they must be informed of their legal rights, which gives them the right to remain silent. When Danny Escobedo was arrested in connection for the shooting of one of his relatives he received an 18-hour interrogation and was later released for not making any self-incriminating statements. Another suspect was later arrested and told police that Escobedo had committed the murder. He was then once again arrested and this time interrogated through the entire night. His attorney had been repeatedly denied permission to talk to his client. Escobedo as well had repeatedly asked to see his lawyer…

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Brief in Irac Format
    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Brief in Irac Format

    In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape. Arizona police took him to the police station and interrogated him for two hours. After the interrogation, Mr. Miranda had confessed to the crimes, and provided officers with a written confession. Language at the top of the written confession stated that the confession was given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises. In addition, the language stated that Mr. Miranda was fully aware of his legal rights. However, Mr. Miranda was not advised that he could remain silent and have an attorney present at the interrogation. Subsequently, the statement was entered into evidence at trial, and Mr. Miranda was convicted and sentenced to prison.…

    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Presser Vs. Illinois Case Study
    • 142 Words
    • 1 Page

    Presser Vs. Illinois Case Study

    Presser V. Illinois was a landmark Supreme Court case in 1816. Herman Presser was part of a Citizen’s militia group, called the Lehr und Wehr Verein. They were a group of armed ethnic German Workers, they had formed in order to counter the armed private armies in Chicago. Herman Presser was indicted for arming a private army without having a license from the Governor. However, his charges were later sent to the U.S Supreme Court. Therefore after reviewing the case, and hearing Herman Presser’s testimony. The Supreme Court ruled in a 9/0 majority. The Supreme Court Stated “Unless restrained by their own constitutions, state legislatures may enact statutes to control and regulate all organizations, drilling, and parading of military bodies and…

    • 142 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Iowa State Penitentiary V. Williams
    • 756 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Iowa State Penitentiary V. Williams

    Decision: In 1980, Williams, seeking a writ of habeas corpus in United States District court was denied but eventually reversed by The Court of Appeals, in that the state failed to prove that the detectives acted in good faith. The United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded the decision, expressing that the condition of the body and the location will be admitted as preponderance of evidence under the exclusionary…

    • 756 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Modern Law: The Miranda V. Arizona Case
    • 140 Words
    • 1 Page

    Modern Law: The Miranda V. Arizona Case

    The Miranda v. Arizona case is considered to be one of the most important and famous cases in modern law history that provided the foundation for some important legal provisions. It occurred in 1966 in Arizona, when a young man named Ernesto Miranda, a Mexican immigrant living in Phoenix, Arizona, was charged with robbery, kidnapping, and rape of a young woman several years prior the trial (Zalman, 2010). Before the suspect was interrogated, the police did not inform him of his constitutional right to remain silent which allowed the interrogators to get the confession. Given that this case provided the foundation for the right to remain silent, it became very famous and important. The present paper attempts to analyze the…

    • 140 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Summary
    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Summary

    The complaining witness identified him in a lineup and he was interrogated by two police officers. The interrogation lasted for hours which finally resulted to Miranda’s signing of a written confession. At trial, the oral and written confessions were presented to the jury and subsequently Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count. He appealed to the Supreme Court of Arizona which held that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated in the course of obtaining the confession.…

    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Marbury V. Madison: (1803) Judicial Review
    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Marbury V. Madison: (1803) Judicial Review

    Arizona: (1966) Rights in custody Ernesto Miranda a man who had not completed the ninth grade was arrested at his home in Arizona and identified as a suspect ina rape-kidnapping case. When he was questioned about the crime Miranda maintained he was innocent, but after two hours of interrogation he signed a confession. At the trial the confession was admitted as evidence and the court found Miranda guilty. The police acknowledged that Miranda had not been made aware. of his rights during the process nor had he had access to legal counsel. While the Miranda confession was given with relatively little pressure it still violated the constitutional requirements that governed such procedures. Inthis case, the Warren court ruled that the accused must be made aware of his or her rights from the…

    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Witherspoon V. Illinois Case Study
    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Witherspoon V. Illinois Case Study

    It was determined in the case of Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968) that upon the trail and conviction of said name petitioner for murder was sentenced to the death penalty. However their was challenge for cause based on an Illinois statute, that allows for any individual juror member that when question at the point of being accepted as potential jurors. If it is determined that he or she would rule in favor of the death penalty, or even rule against the death penalty. The prosecution would be permitted to exclude the prospective jurors for cause with out investigating the determining factor of an impartial ruling. So the supreme court denies the defendant after he…

    • 614 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Smith V Cain Ap Go Po
    • 1275 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Smith V Cain Ap Go Po

    The Supreme Court case of Smith V Cain was an unusual one in which the defendant was claiming that many of his rights were being denied and he was given unfair trial. Smith was being prosecuted for the murder of 5 people in a Louisiana home. The only eye witness was an actual survivor of the shooting whose name was Burl Cain. Cain claimed that Juan Smith was one of the gunmen who murdered 5 innocent people in a Louisiana home. The court case climbed its way from the lower courts due to a writ of Certiorari on January 31st, 2011, and from that point on was sent through a series of juries and decisions in which the original decision of the case was reviewed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court felt that the original claim by Juan Smith that his rights were denied, was plausible and that they needed to certiorari the decision to make sure that Smith was granted another trial. From the Supreme Court’s decision to Certiorari the decision it can be inferred that they wanted to make sure that Juan Smith was rewarded a second and fair trial that would give him a standing chance at actually being escaping the jail time that he would have to serve if he were to actually be convicted of murdering the 5 people in the Louisiana house that day.…

    • 1275 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Hurst V. Florida Case Study
    • 1163 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Hurst V. Florida Case Study

    2. The petitioner, Timothy Hurst, was convicted of first degree murder and the jury recommended the death penalty to the judge in Florida, who then sentenced Hurst to death. Hurst appealed to the Florida Supreme Court and was granted resentencing. The Florida Supreme Court rejected Hurst’s argument and reaffirmed his sentence. The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari.…

    • 1163 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case Study On Bringing A Gun To School
    • 77 Words
    • 1 Page

    Case Study On Bringing A Gun To School

    Lopez was definitely in the wrong in bringing a gun to school, but it should have been up to the state to punish him and Congress should not have gotten involved. I too think that this case kept or court system in check too. If the Court had agreed with Congress then I believe it would have increased Congress’s power. This case showed that Congress could not get away with saying it fit effected the interstate commerce.…

    • 77 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Study
    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Study

    The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona
    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona

    By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.” The Court also held that “without proper safeguards, the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would otherwise do so freely.” Therefore, a defendant “must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.” As those reasons, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Arizona in Miranda, reversed the judgment of the New York Court of Appeals in Vignera, reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Westover, and affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in Stewart.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Arizona vs Miranda
    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Arizona vs Miranda

    Miranda was not given a full and effective warning of his rights. He was not told of his right to remain silent and his right to counsel. Miranda was found guilty of kidnaping and rape and was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count. During the prosecution, Miranda’s court-appointed lawyer, Alvin Moore, objected that because of these facts, the confession was not truly voluntary and should be excluded. In the end of 1966, The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first informs Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court of Arizona detailed the principles governing police interrogation. Arizona ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.…

    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More

Related Topics