Preview

Thomkins Research Paper

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
201 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Thomkins Research Paper
On January 10, 2000, two people got shot on the outside of a shopping mall; one person was killed and another wounded. Thompkins was convicted of murder and firearms related charges in Michigan state trial court. Thompkins was arrested one year later, the police officers had him to read a written form with the Miranda Warnings and the officer read the rest of the form to Thompkins. The police officer asks Thompkins to sign the form to show that he understood his right and he refused. The officers interrogated Thompkins for nearly three hours, Thimpkins responses the police officers with “yes”, “no” or “I don’t know”. Thimpkins didn’t state that he wished to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to stay silent. Later, an officer asked Thompkins if

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Viviam Thomas was born in New Iberia, Lousisana, the son of an carpenter. His family moved to Nashville where he later graduated from high school with honors. Vivian had an older brother who also became a teacher. His brother was involved in the Brown vs Broad Case.…

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 2002, alleging that the evidence that the Arlington Police Department obtained from both his home and work computers was inadmissible claiming an unlawful search and seizure in violation of the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution and article I of the Texas Constitution, Voyles filed a motion to suppress. The Fourth Amendment and Article I of the Texas Constitution provides that a defendant has standing to challenge the admission…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Before being questioned in a police interview room, he was given a written copy of the Miranda warnings and an officer who determined that he could read English, gave him time to read them. Thompkins was also provided with a supplemental warning that stated he had the right to decide at any time before or during questioning to use his right to remain silent or his right to speak with an attorney during questioning. That being said, the officer did not ask him if he wanted to waive those rights. During the interview, Thompkins did not admit anything and gave limited verbal and non verbal responses. About three hours in, he was asked, “Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?” He answered, “yes”. This admission was used against him at trial where he was convicted and…

    • 620 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The issue here is whether a search for weapons without probable cause for an arrest is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the United States. Through the trial the court rejected the prosecution theory that he gun was seized during a lawful…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Janet Ainsworth’s journal article, “’You Have the Right to Remain Silent. . .’ But Only If You Ask for It Just So: The Role of Linguistic Ideology in American Police Interrogation Law,” addresses the complexities that arise when attempting to invoke Miranda rights. Ainsworth begins the article by explaining how the Miranda rights were established as a compromise with its initial goal to alleviate pressure from those detained. She references the Davis v United States case as a key example due to its ruling which held that Miranda rights could only be invoked when the language used by the arrestee has a clear and unambiguous meaning.…

    • 426 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Summary

    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages

    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
  • Powerful Essays

    Andrew Lowe Research Paper

    • 1044 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Victorians are known for their fascination with death. During the Victorian era (1837-1901) they took death very seriously, no expense was spared when arranging a proper funeral. During this time most American’s lives became restricted to the family. As the emotional focus of people narrowed to the immediate family, the significance of the final act expanded.…

    • 1044 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Revelstoke Research Paper

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Have you ever been skiing ? I go skiing all the time and I say Revelstoke is one of the best places to go. At the resort they have a bunch of different runs, a lot of snow, and the other types of skiing they do. Revelstoke is a world class resort with a monster hotel, two gondola, and two extra fast chairlifts.…

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Watkins Vs Watkins

    • 488 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Stated that Watkins was in no way trying to protect his rights under the 5th amendment but was covering up the actions of his previous associates. Since Watkins already admitted his own participation in the issue, he should have not been allowed to exercise his rights.…

    • 488 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Terry Stop Case Study

    • 2397 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Though the trial court rejected the prosecution theory that the guns had been seized during a search incident to a lawful arrest, the court denied the motion to suppress and admitted the weapons into evidence on the ground that the officer had cause to believe that Terry and Chilton were acting suspiciously, that their interrogation was warranted, and that the officer, for his own protection, had the right to pat down their outer clothing having reasonable cause to believe that they might be armed. The court distinguished between an investigatory "stop" and an arrest, and between a "frisk" of the outer clothing for weapons and a full-blown search for evidence of crime. Terry and Chilton were found guilty, an intermediate appellate court affirmed, and the State Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that "no substantial constitutional question" was…

    • 2397 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda never knew he did not have to speak with the police was interrogated and confessed and was sentenced to jail. Later an attorney looked over the case and requested Judicial Review Claiming that Ernesto’s rights has been violated. In 1966 The Supreme Court overturned Miranda’s Conviction, and ruled that if a person is going to be taken in as a suspect they must be informed that they do have a right to and attorney. The suspect also has to be informed that the do not have to speak. The supreme court also ruled that if the suspect is not informed of these right the evidence obtained before hand can not be used in court. These rights are now known as the Miranda rights.…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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

    The case arose when a police officer observed three individuals engaging in conduct which appeared to him, on the basis of training and experience, to be the “casing” of a store for a likely armed robbery; upon approaching the men, identifying himself, and not receiving prompt identification, the officer seized one of the men, (Albanese, J. S. Criminal Justice, 5th edition p.162) patted the exterior of his clothes, and discovered a gun. The Court wrote that the Fourth Amendment was applicable to the situation, applicable “whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his freedom to walk away.” Since the warrant clause is necessarily and practically of no application to the type of on-the-street encounter present in Terry, the question was whether the policeman’s actions were reasonable. The test of reasonableness in this sort of situation is whether the police can point to “specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts,” would lead a neutral magistrate on review to conclude that a man of reasonable caution would be warranted in believing that possible criminal behavior was at hand and that both an investigative stop and a “frisk” was required.…

    • 1039 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Shock Incarceration

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages

    You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during police questioning, if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you by the state. These words have preceded every arrest since Miranda v. Arizona 1966, informing every detained person of his rights before any type of formal police questioning begins. This issue has been a hot topic for decades causing arguments over whether or not the Miranda Warnings should or should not continue to be part of police practices, and judicial procedures. In this paper, the author intends to explore many aspects of the Miranda Warnings including; definition, history, importance to society, constitutional issues, and pro's and con's of having the Miranda Warnings incorporated into standard police procedures.…

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Miranda Rights

    • 1591 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Everyone has heard the term Miranda Rights, whether that be when taking a law class, during the course of a television show, or perhaps through personal experience with their use, but what do these two words really mean, where did they come from and how to they apply to an individual's everyday life? The answers to this question are neither simple nor fully answered today, as challenges to Miranda Rights appear in courtrooms routinely. However, the basis for Miranda Rights can be traced back to a landmark case handed down from the Supreme Court of the United States in 1965 entitled Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda was an immigrant from Mexico living in the Phoenix, Arizona area in 1963 when he was accused of kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman. The victim picked Miranda out of a lineup, and he was subsequently interrogated for two hours during which the police investigators failed to advise him of either his Fifth Amendment Right against self incrimination or his Sixth Amendment Right to request the assistance of an attorney. Over the course of this interrogation, Ernesto Miranda confessed and signed a written confession of his crimes. Included in his confession was acknowledgement that he had waived his right against self-incrimination. After his conviction based on his confession, Miranda's attorney appealed his sentence on the basis that his confession should be excluded because Miranda had not been informed of his rights by the interrogators. The police officers involved offered the defense that because Miranda had a past conviction, he should have been well aware of his rights. The Arizona Supreme Court denied Miranda's appeal, and his conviction was upheld. Miranda's attorney then appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court in 1965, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The Miranda v Arizona case was combined with three other similar cases. When the Supreme Court handed down the decision 5-4 in…

    • 1591 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays