The Innocent Man Book Response Essay

In the case Miranda vs. Arizona. This case goes against the 5th and 6th amendments. Miranda says that the police had violated his 5th Amendment right to remain silent and his 6th Amendment right to legal counsel. Miranda addressed the Escobedo rule which states evidence obtained from an illegally obtained confession is inadmissible in court. Also addressed was the Gideon rule which states all felony defendants have the right to attorney. But the police say that Miranda completely voluntarily signed the confession.

The Sixth Amendment ensures many rights intended to make criminal arraignments more precise, reasonable, and honest. However, the establishments of American criminal equity have changed a notable amount over the past many centuries, driving courts to consider how old rights apply to new organizations and methods.

The illegitimate questioning before his Miranda rights was read to him, violated his sixth amendment right.

In this paper, I will reiterate and discuss the key elements of the rights guaranteed by the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments and their impact on criminal procedure by the courts and police officers. In my opinion these are the most important amendments. The fourth amendment secures unreasonable, searches and seizures, search would be for an officer probing a suspect’s luggage while traveling, or their vehicle, purse, clothing, a motel/hotel or even a place of business. Seizure would be to take evidence such as drugs, firearms, documentation that’s relevant.

Mr. Reece claimed that his defense attorney executed ineffective assistance of counsel, in violation of the Sixth Amendment, by not objecting to the court's use of the D-methamphetamine guideline to enhance Mr. Reece's sentences. Mr. Reece claimed that the court should have used L-methamphetamine as the guideline. (Reece vs. United States, 1997)

In the case of the Maryland and Craig case, the victim was not protected under the Confrontation Clause. The clause was a violation of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. At first, its purpose was to eliminate the face to face between the accuser and the child. The amendment was compelled toward supporting the child but overlooking the rights of the accuser because it eliminates the face-to-face confrontation between the two. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court's stated that the hearsay fulfills the Confrontation Clauses regardless if the victim was a presence of sufficient indicia of reliability(Goodman, 1995). The accuser challenges the law by stating that not only their Sixth Amendment was violated but their Fourteenth Amendment right

Issue 1: Yes, It was a majority rule that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel had exercised a risk with prejudice to the accused, however could be violated, but counsel must be present at significant stages of the trial.

The Bill of Rights states a fair trial are in the states through the fourteenth Amendment. This borders the Sixth Amendment appropriate to guide. In Betts v. Brady, (1963), the court expected the state's refusal to select counsel was not a violation of the key principals of fairness and no due procedure violation

An arrest of “Ernesto Miranda” on a kidnapping and rape case that led to him signing a confession without being told his right to legal counsel, which in turn the officers whom took his confession tried to use the paper he signed along with the typed out confession; in turn this was considered to be incriminating evidence against Miranda because he was not notified of his rights under the fifth amendment.

a.) The excerpt displays the belief that each suspect in a court case has the right to legal representation whether they can afford it or not. The excerpt argues that suspects who can afford a lawyer often hire the most preeminent lawyers “to prepare and present their [thorough] defenses” (1). Thus, the excerpt voices that if a lawyer is this essential to a court case, then they must be provided to those accused who can’t afford one because not providing one could be a sense of restricting one’s freedom.

The sixth amendment states, “ exists, and is needed, in order to protect the fundamental right to a fair trial.”

The January 10, 1984 decision of the Supreme Court in the Strickland v. Washington case is the foundation of the Strickland v. Washington standard. The benchmark for an ineffective assistance of counsel, as indicated in the Sixth Amendment, was instituted by the decision. It is essential for appellants to demonstrate that they were denied of an impartial trial due to the inadequate performance and errors of the counsel as required by the ineffective assistance of counsel claim that was introduced by the Strickland

The actions taken against Rochin were said to “shock the conscience” (Mabunda and Mikula 371). It is against the constitution to allow these methods of obtaining evidence to occur because they exceed the expectations for human decency by such a large margin (Finkelman and Urofsky 290). Despite the fact that there is no direct constitutional statement prohibiting or even addressing this type of behavior, it was clear to the Supreme Court that it should not be tolerated (290). The methods of obtaining evidence clearly obstructed justice and fair play (Mabunda and Mikula 372). Justice Frankfurter felt that they were “too close to the rack and screw to permit constitutional differentiation (Finkelman and Urofsky 290). Other justices found Frankfurter’s decision to be correct, but they felt that the reasoning he used – due process of law – was too vague and difficult to interpret (Mabunda and Mikula 372). Justice Black, who wrote a concurring opinion, believed that the Fifth Amendment was better fit to defend Rochin (Finkelman and Urofsky 290). He stated that the way in which the police obtained the evidence from Rochin was unconstitutional because the Fifth Amendment

John Grisham's The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town is the nonfiction retelling of a 1982 case involving the rape and murder of a 21-year old cocktail waitress in Ada named Debra Sue Carter. For over five years the police were unable to solve the crime. They named Ron Williamson and his friend Dennis Fritz were eventually arrested in 1987 and charged with capital murder. In the absence of physical evidence, the prosecution's case was paper thin and relied on the testimony of less than credible characters (i.e., convicts and jailhouse snitches). Dennis Fritz was found guilty and given a life sentence. Ron Williamson was sent to death row. Both convictions were eventually overturned.

The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton is a book that gave the word “love” many other meanings, such as impossible, meaningless and incomplete. There were many unbearable obstacles that Countess Ellen Olenska, one of the main characters, had to face because of love. She was treated badly by many people and always longed for love but never obtained it. With everyone cursing her, betraying her and hurting her, there was one person who was always there for her. Newland Archer wasn’t only sympathetic towards her; he also began to fall in love with her. The love she always wanted. He was the man who truly cared for her and always helped her make decisions. Out of all the selfish people in New York who