Both the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution involve the right to counsel. 6th amendment grants right to counsel ensures the right to effective assistance of counsel during the critical stages of a criminal prosecution. The Fifth Amendment right to counsel was recognized as part of Miranda v. Arizona and refers to the right to counsel during a custodial interrogation; Meaning It doesn 't necessarily mean handcuffed but the police have taken the suspect his or her freedom of action in any significant way for example a traffic stop. In this case the defendant was not taken to court instead he was arrested assuming that the Miranda rights were read to him dealing with this scenario on the 5th amendment. If jack was interrogated …show more content…
Arraignment/First Appearance at the arraignment, Joe is formally advised of the charges and constitutional rights. Bail is often set during the arraignment. Bail is used by the court almost like an "insurance policy" that you will appear on future court dates. The amount of bail is determined by the judge. The judge will look to two factors in deciding bail: your risk of flight and whether you pose a danger to the community. Bail amounts can range from being released on your own recognizance, all the way up to millions of dollars. In Joes case no bail is …show more content…
Both the defense attorney and the prosecuting attorney have an opportunity to make opening statements, introduce witnesses and evidence in favor of their case, cross-examine witnesses and offer closing arguments. During the deliberation phase of the case, the jury decides whether the prosecution has met the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury finds joe not guilty, you are free to go and not subject to further prosecution based on the same offenses. Sentencing, If Joe is found guilty, the sentencing hearing is where the judge determines and imposes the appropriate punishment. Joe may be sentenced a term in state prison or if otherwise probation. Different crimes carry different possible penalties. Joe also entitled to a sentencing hearing to propose why you believe the judge should give you the lowest possible penalty. Appeals & Writs: If Joe is convicted, He may file an appeal to an appellate level court with the argument that the trial court made legal errors. If the defense can prove that the trial court made legal errors, or you were denied due process of law or a fair trial, it may result in the reversal of Joes
Now that we have discussed the pretrial occurrences, we get into the trial portion of the court process. This is the portion of the process in which both the defense and the prosecution present their cases to the jury, the judge, and the rest of the courtroom. To select a jury, the bring in potential jurors and ask them questions,
Pretrial court is usually within a week from the date that you committed the offense. Did you know that if you can't afford a lawyer, the court would appoint you one? It is the law that you have to be represented by a lawyer during the time of your trial unless you sign a waiver to not have a lawyer at all.
Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Individual rights did not change with the Miranda decision, however it created new constitutional guidelines for law enforcement, attorneys, and the courts. The guidelines ensure that the individual rights of the fifth, sixth and the fourteenth amendment are protected. This decision requires that unless a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning, anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law. The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects.
The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth-Amendment to many American citizens and law makers is considered abstract. The complexity of this concept can easily be traced back to its beginning in which it lacked an easily identifiable principle. Since its commencement in 1789 the United States Judicial system has had a hard time interpreting and translating this vague amendment. In many cases the courts have gone out of their way to protect the freedoms of the accused. The use of three major Supreme Court disputes will show the lengths these Justices have gone through, in order to preserve the rights and civil liberties of three criminals, who were accused of heinous crimes and in some cases were supposed to face up to a lifetime in federal prison.
Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.
are expected to tell the truth, even if that truth was to put you in
Do you know your rights? You have the right to have an attorney that is freely given to you. Prosecutors cannot use statements stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendants unless they demonstrated the use of procedural safeguards, the fifth Amendment was given to us for our safety and rights as being citizens of our community, also a few examples that are similar to Miranda vs. Arizona.
The United States then took its appeal saying that the District Court abused its judgement in sentencing that amounted to additional imprisonment for the respondent. The dismissal of the Government's appeal by the Court of Appeals rested upon it's conclusion that to subject to a defendant to the risk of substitution of a greater sentence is to place him a second time in jeopardy of life or limb.
Many studies have concluded that adults suffer severely from treatment in the criminal justice system, aside from imprisonment (citation). Foremost, the difference between a juvenile delinquent, a juvenile offender and a youthful offender in the state of NY treats individuals different depending upon the charge. A juvenile delinquent is a person at least seven and less than 16 years of age who commits an act which would be a crime if he or she were an adult, and is also found to be in need of supervision, treatment or confinement. This individual’s court case would be held in family court with an initial appearance and taken into custody being designated to a juvenile facility. Custody options include: remand to a NYS certified secure or non-secure Juvenile Detention facility, release with or without appearance ticket for Family Court Intake. Legal representation is limited to a law guardian, legal aid- Juvenile Rights Division or a private attorney. Case decisions are a fact finding hearing only; it is a formal trial in the presence of a judge witnesses may testify to determine if allegations are true. Judicial options include dispositional hearing probation, placement with NY Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) for up to 18 months, adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (ACD),
A number of differences exist between the criminal and civil court systems. In the criminal court system, the victim reports the crime to law enforcement who may investigate. If adequate evidence is found during investigation and an arrest is made, a prosecutor files charges against the defendant. The criminal court system considers the crime to be committed against the state rather than against the individual victim. In a criminal case, the prosecutor acts as the attorney for all the people of the state or jurisdiction. They control all key decisions of the case, such as whether to charge a defendant and what crime to charge, and whether to offer or accept a plea deal or go to trial. If the defendant
The appellant or the losing side of the case puts in a notice of appeal. This is the request to review a case. The appellate court must hear the case but they can decide to accept it or reject the appeal. The case it brought up again and the Appellate court can decide to affirm it, which is agreeing with the lower court decision, they can remand it, which means to send it back to the lower court to relook at specific issues, or it can be reversed, which means the lower court’s decision is set aside and further proceedings are held (Fradella & Neubauer, 2011). If the case is appealed and is heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, then they have to take whatever sentence they get. They cannot appeal it again. This the final part of the process. Whatever is deliberated here is what
Closing Statements: The prosecution will make its closing argument, with the evidence as the prosecution sees it and describing why the jury should concentrate why there should be a guilty verdict. Then the defense will have their chance to explain why the defendant should be a "not guilty" verdict—or at least a guilty verdict on only a lesser charge. The prosecution can the last word, to reason with the jury that he as reiable evidence that they should come back with a guilty verdict.
Once at the formal hearing phase, the prosecutor can put forward a waiver or a delinquency petition. Once a determination is made, the juvenile might either remain in juvenile court or is moved to the criminal court. If she stays in juvenile court, an adjudication hearing occurs. A determination is made anchored in the proof offered. If the juvenile is adjudicated as felonious, the disposition hearing occurs. In the disposition hearing, probation proposals or a disposition plan is considered. A...
The criminal justice process ultimately begins with the people. First, a crime must be committed, or, at the very least, attempted. Second, it must be reported to law enforcement. After the event is reported to the higher authority (meaning law enforcement), an investigation will be opened. This is how a case enters the “system” of cases. If a person is identified, that person is arrested and taken into temporary custody. Additionally, the person is booked, which is, according to CJ 2015, “a process whereby law enforcement formally accuses a person of committing a crime.” After this, the prosecution begins. The arrested subject is then known as the defendant. Formal charges are then made by the prosecutors. However, they are made in a manner
If you plead guilty to a criminal offence it means you accept that you committed the offense and will accept the facts as alleged by the police or other prosecuting body. If you plead not guilty it means that you deny committing the offense. This may mean that you are not sure if you have committed the offense and you wish the court to hear evidence to decide whether you are guilty or not. After you plead guilty or not guilty you have to decide whether you want a bench trial or a jury trial. A bench trial takes place in front of a Judge only, there is no jury involved. The Judge is both the finder of fact and ruler on matters of law and procedure. This means that the Judge decides the verdict. A Jury trial is a legal proceeding in which a Jury either makes a decision or makes findings of fact, which then direct the actions of a