Preview

Miranda Rights Case Study

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
702 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Miranda Rights Case Study
Did the officers adhere to the procedural steps that are required once the suspect incriminates himself? The rule in this case is in order for the suspect to be read the Miranda rights; Officer must have both, Custody and Interrogation. They must also use the “4 prong test if suspect’s statements can be admitted into evidence. Was the statement voluntary? Was the Miranda warning given? Was there a waiver by the suspect? Was the waiver intelligent and voluntary”? (Roberson, C, Harvey Wallace. 1/2015 pg. 105). After analyzing the case study, it specifically states that, “John voluntarily made incriminating statements to the arresting officers”. In chapter 3 it states that “voluntary statements made by the defendant without having received …show more content…
First issues will be that John has no money for bail. However he can consider that since John has no money he can have an exoneration of bail. In which as long as he appears in court when told to so, his bond will be exonerated. Since he has no money, I would not consider him as a flight risk but would need to check on his family history financial abilities in order for him to flee the country. If it is deem that his family back in his country is financially able to pay for a ticket, then I would also consider him as a flight risk. …show more content…
1/2015 pg. 111) Depending on each state, arraignment must occur in a reasonable manner after arrest. If not handle in a timely manner it could violate the defendant constitutional rights. The 6th amendment states “a right to speedy trial”. If it delays for a long period of time, the defendant could ask for a dismissal. When an arraignment is conducted, the defendant must be read his constitutional rights. It also informs them of the charges against him or her. The defendant will then enter a plea bargain that will range from the following pleas: guilty, not guilty, nolo contendere, not guilty by reasons of insanity, former jeopardy, former judgment of acquittal or conviction. The defendant must be read his constitutional rights. They also set conditions of release, such as Bail or Bond, Release on own recognizances, other conditions and supervised release.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Case Study Havon

    • 372 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Client is moved here from Columbia after having his two daughters because of the war going on in Columbia. The Client reports that the war has been going on for years and his family was in need of a way out. In Columbia the client was employed as a lawyer. He was able to support his family and move them to the United States. He struggled when he…

    • 372 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John R. Harig Case Study

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages

    And, while Harig had been incarcerated in the jail on a prior offense, with his release imminent, Knowling asked the court to reconsider the higher bond “based on the serious nature of the threats made against Chief Probation Officer Roger Estill” and a believe Harig “is a significant risk to carry out his previous threat.”…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    FACTS: The cases of Mr. Miranda, Mr. Vignera, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Westover had similar cases, regarding the admissibility of their confessions. These cases were then addressed together by the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Miranda was identified by a witness and arrested, but was not notified of his rights, although he singed a written confession after several hours of interrogation that stated that he was aware of the rights he was not notified about. A jury was presented an oral admission of guilt, as well as the written confession. The jury found Mr. Miranda guilty of murder and rape, and sentenced him to 20-30 years on both counts. Mr. Vignera, who was the second defendant, was arrested for a…

    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ocr Law Unit1 Chapter 5

    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Can be dealt with in first hearing but unlikely, may need to gather evidence of root guilty plea, request medical reports, call witnesses, other information to determine sentence in guilty plea.…

    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Their reasoning behind this decision was because it needed to be stated that he had to the right to remain silent. Not only this, but he was not told that anything that he said could be used against him in the future. These reasons were then able to prove that Miranda was not able to speak to the police freely upon his own choice of decision. One of the reasons for the decision made was because Miranda did not know he had the right to an attorney leading for him to not have full knowledge of the case and what was going on. Therefore, because the fifth amendment was not applicable to the situation that Miranda was in the prosecution should not have been able to use any of the statements that were…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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
  • Better Essays

    The Supreme Court decision of 1966 of Miranda dictated a specific practice and conduct that law enforcement had to comply with when dealing with criminal suspects. It established that law enforcement was demanded to advise arrested persons or suspects of criminal acts that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them, and they have the right to an attorney. If they were not informed of these rights then a violation had occurred under the 5th Amendment regarding self-incrimination.…

    • 1197 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    the of the arraignment hearing. The defense attorney will consult with the client, decide on an…

    • 1017 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    After the charges are filed with the court the suspect will be taken to see a judge for an initial appearance. “ If a defendant is charged only with a misdemeanor, then his or her first court appearance is considered the arraignment. The formal charges are read and the defendant enters a plea. But if charged with a felony, this hearing is simply the initial appearance before the court.” (Wright, 2013). If the judge believes that the evidence is insufficient the case can be dismissed, but if the judge believes that the evidence is sufficient the case will go…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 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

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which passed 5–4. The Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them.…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Defendants who are not released on bail are being denied the opportunity to prepare their defense. Also, denying bail or having excessive bail imprisons the defendant without being properly convicted. There are cases, however, where bail must be denied or set excessively high. If an unconvicted defendant is feared to be a danger to the…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Miranda Rights are part of a preventative criminal procedure rule that states law enforcement are required to administer Miranda Rights to an individual who is in custody and is subject to direct questioning for a criminal violation of law. When a person is detained or taken into custodial arrest and interrogated for a criminal offense, if he or she wishes to remain silent the individual must expressly state that he or she chooses to remain silent. In addition, if the individual asserts that he or she wishes to speak to an attorney or have an attorney present, police must then cease interrogations and wait until…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    8th Amendment

    • 1165 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Eighth Amendment The 8th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, as well as the setting of excessive bail or the imposition of excessive fines. However, it has also been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States (according to the Eighth Amendment)to inflict physical damage on students in a school environment for the purpose of discipline in most circumstances. The 8th Amendment stipulates that bail shall not be excessive. This is unclear as to whether or not there is a constitutional right to bail, or only prohibits excessive bail, if it is to be granted. The Supreme Court has never directly addressed this interpretation problem, because federal law has always guaranteed that privilege in all non-capital cases (Compton's).…

    • 1165 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays