Essay on The 5th Amendment

“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 an attorney...this is what you hear on all your favorite cop shows. But, where did this saying come from? In 1963 Ernesto Miranda a ninth grade dropout (PBS) was arrested and charged with kidnaping, rape, and armed robbery. The police interrogated him for two hours. During the question Miranda supposedly admitted to all the crimes. The police then used Miranda’s confession to convict him in court. While in prison Miranda appealed his case and eventually brought it to the Supreme Court. The court ruled five to four in favor of Miranda. The Supreme Court was correct in their ruling of Miranda v. Arizona, because

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” - Second Amendment. Throughout history, this sentence of twenty seven words has caused an intense debate. The polemic is that some people claim that a gun control policy is unconstitutional, while others disagree and even say it is necessary in order to reduce crime. Now, what does gun control mean? If it means to analyze who is responsible enough to own a gun by a “Universal Background Check”; that sounds right to everyone. But in the article “What Are Obama’s Gun Control Proposals? An Easy Guide” published in the National Journal by Matt Vasilogambros. The author states that the “gun-control

A man in court randomly yells out the phrase “I plead the fifth,” and now he doesn’t have to talk anymore! When the man said I plead the fifth he refers back to the fifth amendment. The fifth amendment says this, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Well first of all who introduce the famous 5th amendment. Well according to the Kids Laws they said that, “The Fifth Amendment was introduced into the Constitution by James Madison.” (kids.laws.com). So really James Madison was the one who introduced the whole concept of having that as the 5th amendment and well the White House does describe him as “... a small, wizened man, appeared old and worn” (whitehouse.gov) he was indeed a very smart man. Well now over the course of the amendments time there has been some controversy about the amendment, according to Constitution Daily, they made a whole story having to do with asking the question, “Do government employees like an Internal

The Sixth Amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. It guarantees rights related to criminal prosecutions in federal courts and it was ruled that these rights are fundamental and important. The Sixth Amendment gives the accused the right to speedy and public trial by the impartial jury. The accused has the right to be informed of the nature and reason of accusation and also be confronted with the witness against him as well as obtaining witness in his favor. In this research paper I will provide a thorough analysis of these above rights and give some history of the 6th Amendment.

This Amendment was passed by Congress on September 25, 1789 and was ratified by the states December 15, 1789. It is a part of the Bill of Rights, the first Ten Amendments of the Constitution.

In 1789, the Congress created the Bill of Rights to make sure the people are protected and the government has limitations. The Third Amendment states, “No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” (“Bill of Rights”). Throughout the years the amendments have been manipulated, in a way, to be used in a certain way. In researching the Third Amendment, one will find the past and present of the Quartering of Soldiers through the origins of the law, modern application of the amendment, and its current effectiveness.

The First Amendment is the first section of the Bill of Rights and is often considered the most important part of the U.S Constitution because it guarantees the citizens of United States the essential personal freedoms of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly and the freedom to petition the Government. Thanks to the rights granted by the First Amendment, Americans are able to live in a country where they can freely express themselves, speak their mind, pray without interference, protest in peace and where their opinions are taken into consideration, which is something not many other nationalities have the fortune of saying. The Founding Fathers were the framers of the Constitution of the U.S., and the responsible for the

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is part of our countries Bill of Rights. The first amendment is perhaps the most important part of the U.S. Constitution because the amendment guarantees citizens freedom of religion, speech, writing and publishing, peaceful assembly, and the freedom to raise grievances with the Government. In addition, amendment requires that there be a separation maintained between church and state.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” –U.S. Constitutional Amendments

All Americans are entitled to their rights. The Fourth Amendment states that we the people have to deny search and seizures from law enforcement without a warrant. The fourth amendment generally prohibits police from entering a home without a warrant unless the circumstances fit an established exception to the warrant requirement. According to the book The Constitution: Our Written Legacy by Joseph A. Melusky, the Fourth Amendment gives the right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Although we are entitled to these rights, police sometimes use and abuse their authority. In many cases, the Fourth Amendment has helped prove the innocence of one’s actions.

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 Fifth Amendment is one of the most well known laws in America, it is used and abused every single day since it was made. The Fifth Amendment is an amendment in the Bill of Rights which protects criminals rights, and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For one to completely analyze the Fifth Amendment, one must evaluate and interpret the origin of the Amendment, modern uses and abuses, and current effectiveness of the law.

The Sixth Amendment of the Bill of Rights contains seven clauses that protect the rights of the accused. The amendment assures the accused that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in

Double jeopardy is the prosecution of a person for an offense for which he or she has already been prosecuted. The double jeopardy clause, which is in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, was designed to protect an individual from being subject to trials and possible convictions more then once for an alleged offense. The idea was not to give the State too much over the individual, this way no individual will be subject to embarrassment, expense, and ordeal against being tried for an alleged offense more then once. It also reduces the possibility of someone innocent being found guilty. The double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment embodies three protections to criminal

The 5th Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees protection from self-incrimination. If there were no Fifth Amendment, there would be self-incriminating clause issues, such as: every time you are charged with a crime, you would be interrogated with no right remain silent; whenever law enforcement desires to subpoena your personal records, you would have no right to assert a claim against self-incrimination; a refusal to testify on the grounds of self-incrimination could be punished as a crime; confessions obtained through custodial interrogation would, in many circumstances, become admissible [there would be little, if any, deterrent to harsh interrogation techniques]; prosecutors could ask juries to draw an inference of guilt from a defendant's failure to testify. A case that comes from the 5th amendment is Miranda vs. Arizona , which took place in 1966 [the case from which the Miranda Rights were composed]. This case involved an $8.00 theft and a twenty year prison sentence. Ernesto Miranda was arrested for theft and interrogated by police for two hours when he confessed that he had kidnapped and raped a woman a few days earlier. Miranda was not aware that he was allowed to have an attorney present during questioning nor that he had the right to remain silent. He was convicted based off of his confession; therefore, he was sentenced to twenty years in prison. Because he was not aware of this right, his lawyers appealed through the courts. The Supreme Court