Preview

Right To Counsel

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1207 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Right To Counsel
Right to Counsel

CJA/364
05/25/2014

Right to Counsel
Right to Counsel The right to be represented by an attorney is one of the most important rights that are awarded to the accuser. The accused person of a crime usually does not receive adequate defense without having the assistance of counsel. In the twentieth century, the development of the right to counsel mainly focused on the issues of whether the state had to pay for the poor’s attorney. With the case of Powell v. Alabama, the court found that free counsel had to be provided as well. The Sixth Amendment of the right to counsel prior to the initiation process, individuals has a right to counsel, which is the Fifth Amendment right. Zalman (2008) stated” Counsel is required
…show more content…
The Fifth Amendment’s primary purpose is to make sure that police officers do not overwhelm the suspect during the interrogation process while they are in custody. Furthermore, it helps in the prevention of self-incrimination while in custody interrogations. Individuals who face criminal proceedings within the court system will be protected by the Sixth Amendment. “The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches when formal criminal proceedings have been initiated against him whether by way of formal charges, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment” (Ferdico, Fradella, and Totten, 2012, p. 522). No offer should participate in behavior in which can bring incriminating responses upon the defendant without their counsel being present or the defendant waiving their rights to counsel. The defendant should not be questioned by anyone without an attorney present, unless the defendant waives their Sixth Amendment rights to obtain …show more content…
“The accused has a constitutional right to counsel, and if the defendant cannot afford an attorney, the state must provide one” (p. 161). A public defender will be appointed by the court if the defendant is indigent. Although, if the accused can afford counsel, they may hire their own counsel through a private sector. The defense attorney’s role is to simply provide fairness and adequate defense for the accused. The defense attorney’s job is to fight for the state’s case against the defendant as well as to avoid the conviction of an innocent individual. They have to provide legal counsel to the defendant in avoiding the conviction of an innocent defendant. They have to also provide legal counsel to protect the constitutional rights of the defendant. Also, the case that is built by the defense will guarantee that the defendant will not be wrongfully convicted of criminal actions if they are

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    6th Amendment guarantees you a speedy trail, an impartial jury, that the accused can comfort the witnesses against them, and must be allowed a…

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    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
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Brief Fact Summary: Self-incriminating evidence was provided by the defendants while interrogated by police without prior notification of the Fifth Amendment Rights of the United States Constitution.…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling of Miranda v. Arizona set a precedence on how future suspects would be interrogated. It makes complete sense to advise a person that is being interrogated that he or she has a right to remain silent during interrogation and that he or she has the right to have counsel present during an interrogation. It's also important that the suspect be fully aware and full understand his or her rights before the interrogation begins. -WRITTEN AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION-METHODS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT By Harvey Wallace and Cliff Roberson(CHAPTER 9 PAGE 136)…

    • 341 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Best Essays

    In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that the Sixth Amendment guarantees every defendant, regardless of socioeconomic status, the right to an attorney and equal protection under the court of law. This means that an indigent defendant that cannot afford to hire a private attorney may have a public defender appointed to him or her. However, fifty years later, the promises of Gideon v. Wainwright may remain unfulfilled. Public defenders may not be able to provide the same treatment to their clients as a private attorney, resulting in harsher sentences being placed on indigent defendants. This is clearly not the equal treatment that Gideon sought, and it is rather evident that the public defender system is very flawed.…

    • 2715 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Best Essays

    Alabama are a clear statement of the importance of the defendant’s right to counsel in a criminal proceeding. The right to counsel has been the source of much controversy within the U.S. law over the past decades. However, in the light of the words of Justice Sutherland, the failure of the trial court to appoint counsel was found a denial of due process. The Powell case holding declared that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment required that state courts give defendants an opportunity to obtain counsel for defendants in all capital cases who are not able to afford one and an attorney free of charge in noncapital…

    • 1666 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Supreme Court consolidated four separate court cases with issues concerning the admissibility of evidence obtained during police interrogations. All the defendants in each of these occurrences offered incriminating evidence during interrogations from police and were not notified prior to the interrogations of their rights granted to them under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Miranda was arrested and taken into custody to a police station where he was identified by the witness. He was questioned for 2 hours by officers without being advised of his right to counsel and then signed a statement that said that his confession was voluntary. ISSUE: Whether the government is required to notify the detained individuals of their constitutional rights granted by the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination prior to the individuals being interrogated by the authorities and assistance of counsel and give a voluntary waiver of these rights as a necessary precondition to police questioning and the giving of a…

    • 647 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Defense attorneys often have to defend clients who are guilty of horrible crimes such as murder, rape, or assault with a deadly weapon. Their job is to defend the client, no matter of what the client actually did; their job is to try and get them off, or get them the minimum punishment. Attorney also have an attorney-client privilege, where the attorney is to keep anything the client tells them a secret, unless it is agreed upon to be used in the trial by both parties; the client and the attorney. So if a client was convicted to 25 years for killing two police officers and then admits to their defense attorney that they committed a third murder of a security guard, the attorney is expected not to relay this…

    • 549 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs Arizona

    • 1766 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona was one of a series of landmark Supreme Court cases of the mid-1960 's establishing new guarantees of procedural fairness for defendants in criminal cases. The Court 's decision in Miranda sprang from two different lines of precedents under the Fourteenth Amendment. One of these lines was the right-to-counsel cases: Powell v. Alabama (1932), in which the Court held that indigent defendants had to be afforded counsel in capital cases; Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), which extended the right to counsel for indigent defendants to all felony cases; and Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), in which the Court held that a confession obtained from a defendant who had asked for and been denied permission to speak to an attorney was inadmissible. By 1964, the right to counsel had expanded to include mandatory representation for indigents at trial in all felonies and also gave potential defendants the right to representation during questioning while in custody if they requested it.…

    • 1766 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages

    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 inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The police duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a witness against himself," and Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney.…

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona was the case that altered the criminal justice system. It gives criminals the rights they do not deserve. Ernesto Miranda was the man who was responsible for the change in law enforcement. He argued that he was not informed of his rights during his arrest and his Fifth and Sixth amendments were violated. After that, the Miranda Rights were established to protect the suspect from refusing to answer self-incriminating questions and the right to an attorney. The Fifth Amendment’ s rights protection against self- incrimination and double jeopardy, and right to a grand jury indictment . The Sixth Amendment’s right to a speedy and public trial, trial by jury, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and counsel.…

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The case of Miranda v. Arizona dealt with the question, “Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?” This case started in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for robbing $8 from a bank worker, and was charged with armed robbery. He already had a record for armed robbery, and a juvenile record including attempted rape, assault, and burglary. While Miranda was in police custody, he signed a written confession to the robbery, and also to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days before the robbery. After being convicted, Miranda’s lawyer appealed; on the basis that the defendant did not know he was protected from self-incrimination and therefore did not have to confess to his crimes.…

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Public defenders don’t put values on money – they are mostly short on budget all the time – and they are the only ones who stand up for people who cannot afford, or whom no one wants to defend for. According to the United States Constitution sixth amendment, everyone has a right to have an attorney when they are arraigned in the court. Public defenders are the leading figures that follow the sixth amendment recognized by the government. But there is also a dilemma the public defenders would have to face. Michael Becker told us that it makes him feel more pressured when he knows the defendant is innocent, because if he loses the trial, he feels guilty for not being able to prove his innocence. However, If I were a public defender, the biggest dilemma I would have is to overcome the inner madness at the convict, particularly when the defendant shows no signs of regret; especially the case of psychopaths, who cannot sympathize with the victims and enjoy the agony of the victim or enjoy the murder itself. For example, Richard Ramirez, a serial killer with 20 victims, said after he was caught “I love to kill people. I love watching them die. I would shoot them in the head and they would wiggle and squirm all over the place, and then just stop. Or I would cut them with a knife and watch their faces turn real white. I love all that blood. I told one lady to give me all her money. She said no. So I cut her and pulled her eyes out.” If my client told me that, I would feel an urge to flip everything upside down. I cannot picture myself defending those horrendous criminals who trampled the victim’s rights…

    • 1029 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    A defense attorney can either be hired by the client, or the courts can appoint one to the accused. Prosecutors are there to represent the people and that…

    • 1422 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Benefits of Legal Counsel

    • 558 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Deciding to get the help of a counsel whether to take a settlement offer or pursue litigation is a difficult decision to make. One must weigh the cost of retaining services of a counsel versus the complexity of the case or the amount of compensation.…

    • 558 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays