Escobedo

Escobedo v. Illinois Monsees, Escobedo v. Illinois: Right to seek counsel Mark Monsees Liberty High School AP - Government 3A/B The right to consult a lawyer when being questioned by the police is a very important right as it could potentially save an individual from being convicted for whatever he or she has been accused of. This case was centered on Danny Escobedo who was taken into custody by the Chicago police department on January 20th, 1964, for the shooting of his brother-in-law

were minorities, and the suspect in this case was a minority African American female. The case effectively changed policing by creating the exclusionary rule, which made all states exclude any evidence that was obtained illegally by police. The Escobedo case was important for Due Process as it extended the exclusionary rule to confessions that were obtained illegally wherein defendants requested a lawyer after police began to focus squarely on the defendant as a suspect. If the suspect requests

Miranda vs. Arizona:      This case had to do with an Ernest Miranda who raped a Patty McGee*. After extracting a written confession from the rapist about the situation, Miranda’s lawyer argued that it was not valid since the Phoenix Police Department failed to read Miranda his rights, also in violation of the Sixth Amendment which is the right to counsel. Some factors that helped support Miranda’s arguments were that the suspect had requested and been denied an opportunity

This case is a good example that proves that the constitution is living. In order to be living, the constitution must be enforced at all times. In this case, Danny Escobedo was arrested and taken to a police station. The police denied his request to see his lawyer. He never spoke to his lawyer and Escobedo confessed to murder. Escobedo was denied his right to counsel. This broke the 6th amendment of the constitution. Once again, the constitution adapted. It began to be enforced that one has the right

generations. Many second generation, Mexican American youth, more specifically those known as zoot suiters and pachuco(a)s, refused to, “abide by the norms of segregation,” creating a new, rebellious identity that defied all social expectation, (Escobedo 136). The pachuca women of World War II challenged societies labels and their communities traditions, creating their own individual, outrageous and flamboyant ideas of beauty and lifestyle. These actions took Anglo and Mexican immigrant communities

Literature Review In our current healthcare system, the delivery of health related services involves the “movement” of patients from one care setting to another. Also recognized as transitions of care these actions often occur between acute-care hospitals and post-acute care settings such as rehabilitation centers and nursing homes. Transitions of care, however, do not only occur between in-patient settings. Patients discharged from the hospital to their home or shuffled between a primary care clinic

Wearing odd articles of clothing nowadays has nothing to do with the government. On the contrary, wearing odd articles of clothing in the midst of a world war can get you into a lot of trouble. All that you have to do is tune in on the pachuca crisis that occurred in Los Angeles. The term “pachuco” and “pachuca” was donned onto young Mexican men and women who wore attire unbefitting the American norm. In Escobedo’s article, “The Pachuca Panic: Sexual and Cultural Battlegrounds in World War II Los

Equality is an important staple in which America was founded on. In the years since America’s making, the US has made many advances for equality for women, people of color, rich and poor, and veterans. Specifically, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 helped people of color, the making of WAAC helped women, and the case of Gideon vs. Wainwright helped less wealthy Americas. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a big step in equality for people of color. This bill made many discriminatory actions illegal. Before

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power

were seen as taboo in the Mexican community. According to Elizabeth R. Escobedo (2007), Pachuca’s were more than just a fashion rebels but they represented an important symbolic site changing the social landscape of the war years. These young women rebelled against social conventions using style and behavior. Pachuca’s challenged mainstream norms of proper feminine, especially Mexican femininity. (Escobedo, 2007) As Escobedo (2007) mentions in her article, Pachuca’s defined themselves as a group