Pendulum Law In Criminal Justice

Due process is when all criminal suspects are guaranteed that they will have the ability to question the evidence against them in an open format. This is where they are entitled to the same protections and procedures as everyone else during a criminal proceeding. As a result, anything that is denying them of these safeguards is violation of their basic rights. (Sundahl, 2011)

Miranda V. Arizona has been a case that impacted our police officers and offenders and is still in place today. In 1996 Phoenix Arizona Ernesto Miranda a 18 year old school drop out with a 8th grade reading level was convicted of kidnaping and rapping a 18 year old girl.. He was a troubled teen growing up convicted of small offenses but this offense made the headlights. The women who was raped went home and told her family, one day her brother sees a car that matches the description and part of the license plate Ernesto Miranda’s car matching the description and was asked to come down to the police station for questioning. Ernesto Miranda lines up with other men on a line and the women says “that looks like him but I would have to hear his voice to fully identify him”, As the integration went on he was told that a women had positively accused him, which was false. Not only did the police lie to him but after that the investigation was on for two hours, he then signed a written confession. He was found guilty and He later states that he had no right to counsel and was never read his rights this case was taken to the Arizona supreme court. The court supported the ruling so Miranda and his lawyer now took it to the united states supreme court , the constitutional issue was the 5th amendment establish the people’s rights to not have witness against them self and the 6th amendment which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney was also violated. In the Supreme

Due Process of law can be defined as a right guaranteed in the 5th and 14th amendments of the U.S.

Some of these rights are the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty, the right against arrest without probable cause, the right against self-incrimination, the right to an attorney, and the right to fair questioning by the police. All of this is part of the Due Process Model but one thing the Due Process Model calls into question is, do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many? (Perron)

The second relevant point to make in support of the claim that accused people should be read their Miranda Rights is that these rights help avoid self-incrimination. For example, if these rights are not given, any statements made by the accused during interrogation may be turned against him or her while on trial. Additionally, if these rights are not given, the suspect may be pressured into a confession. In short, to maintain a fair and balanced legal system, people accused of a crime should be advised of their

The jury system in America is also influence by the English jury system. Another one of America’s constitutional right is due process which is the basic for fairness that is important in the judicial system which allows our system to work with honor and integrity. According to Currie (1992), the factors of due process involve the United States Constitution; Amendments V, and XIV and in 1970 Illinois State Constitution adopted some rights for due process.

One example of this was in the case of Richardson v. Wright (1972). This law required the opportunity to appeal and provide sufficient evidence before the state can terminate disability benefits (407,O’Brien). Today it is your right to appeal and to plead your case so the state won’t cut the benefits off since these individuals rely on these to sustain their economic lifestyles. The due process clause was broken into two processes which were substantive and procedural due process. “Procedural due process implies, the minimum objectives the government before it deprives any citizen of life, liberty, or property” (545, Chemerinsky). Procedural due process refers to a specific kind of notice and the opportunity to provide a cross examination for the recipient to plead its case to not lose their benefits. The second process is

There are a lot of very important cases in U.S. history which have impacted what America’s judicial system looks like today, Miranda Vs. Arizona is the prime example of that. This case had controversial issues and has changed what process happens when you get arrested and that is a big deal. If this case hadn’t had happened police behavior would be a very different process than it is today. Miranda Vs. Arizona was a case that changed the United States of America forever.

After the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Miranda, there were several changes made to the detaining and arresting processes for law enforcement in the United States. The laws were then changed to require all law enforcement to read what would go on to be titled a citizen’s “Miranda Warning” which explained, the right to remain silent, the right to a lawyer or public defendant, and that anything they say will be used against them. All of these

Cases such as Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and Terry v. Ohio (1968) added to the accused party rights. It defined the Warren Court administration era judgements. Similarly, the Miranda rights case changed the course of criminal procedures in the country. The landmark Supreme Court case, Miranda v. Arizona (1966), forced states to comply with their judgement to avoid violating a person’s Fifth Amendment right. As stated in the U.S. Constitution, a part of the amendment states, “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself” (U.S. Constitution). The Supreme Court changed the conduct of police officers with a person held in custody (Long 149). Basically, the protect individuals from incriminating against their selves. The Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Supreme Court case allowed defendants to receive lawyers to help them in serious cases (Johnson 148). Then, the Terry v. Ohio (1968) Supreme Court decision allowed police officers to conduct reasonable sources without a warrant (Johnson 154). These cases represent a time in U.S. history where supports of individual rights would find victory in the court. The exception of those would be the Terry case where the Justices would put a limit of the warrants controversy. With that being said, future similar court cases limited the scope of the original decisions. Nevertheless, progress was made during

The Miranda v. Arizona was about a Mexican immigrant which he was called Ernesto Miranda. He was arrested in his home and brought to the police station where he identified by the witness. While he was being interrogated by the police the police failed to explain the 5th Amendment and the 6th Amendment to him which is protection against self- incrimation and his right to have an attorney. He was convicted and sentenced 20 to 30 years in jail. The Supreme Court decided by 1966 a 5-4 majority. This case created the Miranda Rights which helps enforce our civil rights as people.

As we can see, due process has changed our justice system from hastily-prosecution to time consuming investigation of all the facts. We should stop pre-judging the accused person until all of the facts are made known unto us. Due process has given all accused citizens an equal opportunity to tell their story, and the right to question the evidence that was brought against them. Even though due process has guaranteed the accused person his or her right to be heard

In our government today we have due process of law. Due process of law simply means that we have protection against a chance deprivation of life, liberty or property. Within the due process law, if you are to be accused of something it has to be under fair and reasonable circumstances. If we are ever to be arrested of something, under due process it commands that we are taken to court and showed a cause. It is very important that we have due process in the law for the people of the United States. Law enforcement always requires the balancing of two competing social concerns: on one hand, is the government's interest in protecting its citizens and prosecuting criminal conduct; on the other hand, is the right of

The Supreme Court of the United States of America often makes decisions, which change this great nation in a great way. These changes can affect society in many different ways. In many instances there is dissonance over their decisions and the court itself is often split as to how the views are looked upon. The effect of the Courts decision generates discourse and on occasion, violence. This is what happened in the case of Miranda v. Arizona in 1966. This case changed the history of this country and left a tremendous impact, which many challenge, the ruling and still protest today.

The two types of due process is the procedural due process and the substantive due process. Procedural due process is that government officials must follow procedures and not act without a reason when making laws. It requires the government to act in particular ways before regulating or taking away the life, liberty, or property of someone. The proceedings must be clear by stating the charges that the person have done and fair where they have a jury and the right to bring witnesses. Substantive due process is the Constitution prohibits some laws, no matter how popular those laws may be with legislatures, executives, or the people. It is based on the idea that some rights are important to the point that the government must have a reason to change