Free Essay

Accused Versus Victim’s Rights

In: Historical Events

Submitted By JocelyneOsuna
Words 1921
Pages 8
Accused Versus Victim’s Rights
The United States of America relies on due process of law to ensure equal protection of life, liberty and property to all citizens. Police officers work tirelessly to accommodate regulations adopted to ensure only criminals are convicted. These restrictions have been part of the United States since the Bill of Rights was generated in 1791, but in the 1960s, as “Law and Order,” the view that crime must be dealt with harshly to deter citizens from breaking the law, the Supreme Court was forced to decide the constitutionality of the rules of interrogation. In the Sixties, crime was escalating and public safety was becoming a growing concern; police began to treat suspects harsher in an effort to raise conviction rates and promote public safety. In 1966, however, the jurisprudence of the entire US justice system changed when the court of Chief Justice Earl Warren was presented with the case Miranda v Arizona. In this case, the majority decision ruled to protect suspects’ rights, extending equality of protection regardless of legal knowledge or background, not only highlighting the trends of human rights and equality in the Sixties, but also the tensions between criminal rights versus public safety, demonstrating a shift from the conservative ‘law and order’ jurisprudence to more liberal methods of interrogation and conviction.
On March 2, 1963, Ernesto Miranda kidnapped a woman (whose name was not released to the press for her safety), drove her into the desert, and raped her. After an eleven day investigation, Detectives Cooley and Young caught Miranda and took him to police station for questioning. During Miranda’s interrogation, he was told he had been positively identified in a lineup (which was false) and that he could not leave until he gave a full confession. Miranda wrote out his confession on a sheet of paper with a preprinted statement indicating he knew his Constitutional rights and was voluntarily confessing. He was charged with rape and kidnapping in the first degree and, because of the 1963 Supreme Court case Gideon v Wainwright (right to an attorney free of charge)
, the court appointed him 73-year old public defender Alvin Moore. Prosector Lawrence Turoff was assigned to prosecute Miranda and prepared a case around Miranda’s written confession. Moore’s defense focused on Miranda’s ignorance to his legal right to an attorney during questioning, claiming his confession was involuntary. Thus, when Turoff tried to present the written confession to the jury, Moore objected because of the involuntary nature of the confession. Judge Yale McFate, however, overruled his objection because of the preprinted message on the top of the handwritten confession indicating the confession was voluntary
. After a short trial, the jury found Ernesto Miranda guilty of rape and Judge Yale McFate sentenced him to 20 to 30 years in jail.
Moore appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming McFate had abridged Miranda’s fourteenth amendment rights that “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law” and Miranda’s due process was violated when his involuntary confession was presented to the jury. The prosecution also submitted a brief, stating that Miranda had a fair trial because the law does not require a lawyer during interrogation unless asked for. The decision was written by Justice Ernest W. McFarland after an unanimous vote decided police had not violated any of Miranda’s rights by interrogating him without an attorney thus validating the confession and upholding the conviction. Though Moore, after this decision, stopped representing Miranda, Miranda had not given up and wrote a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court, explaining why his incarceration was unconstitutional. Luckily for Miranda, Robert Corcoran from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) had been trying to build a case to help the accused not fall victim to ignorance with the law and heard of Miranda; he then raised the attention of two successful lawyers John P. Frank and John J. Flynn who wrote a writ of certiorari on Miranda’s behalf accompanied by a letter from Arizona assistant Attorney General Gary K. Nelson expressing the importance of the United State’s Supreme Court’s review of the case
. The case was then sent to Chief Justice Warren.
Chief Justice Earl Warren’s court, referred to as the Warren Court, was known for liberal, controversial and social cases and was viewed both positively and negatively by the public. Time Magazine said in 1969, “...the court that Warren led demonstrated its overriding concern with the rights of the individual—even though many critics complained that in some instances it had already gone too far.” Warren’s liberal view of the Constitution faced both praise and criticism from all branches of the government. Dwight Eisenhower, who appointed Warren, later regretted his decision, saying a few years after the appointment that Warren was the “Biggest damfool mistake I ever made.” Nixon’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, however, admired Warren, writing that he was “The greatest Chief Justice of them all.” Warren led a court which University of Chicago Law Professor Harry Kalven Jr. calls having an “appetite for action” and its penchant for “taking on tough social questions where the pressures were very high.” When the Warren court took on the Miranda case in 1966, people were anxious about which side the court would chose: accused rights or the victim’s.
The court interpreted the fifth and fourteenth amendments, and ruled in a five to four majority that Miranda deserved a retrial on the basis that suspects have rights against self-incrimination. In the decision, which took Warren over an hour to read, he spoke about the unconstitutionality of interrogation within the current system, “incommunicade interrogation of individuals in a police-dominated atmosphere, resulting in self-incriminating statements without full warnings of constitutional rights...exacts a heavy toll on individual liberty and trades on the weakness of individuals.” Thus, by not having a lawyer present, or not knowing the right to a lawyer, during questioning, the environment of the interrogation puts the suspect in a situation where he may self-incriminate, therefore not granting him equal protection of the due process of the law, required by the fourteenth amendment. Warren’s decision was approved by Justices Black, Douglas, Brennan and Fortas, who concluded the fifth and fourteenth amendments cannot equally protect citizens who are unaware of the law without being explicitly stated at the time of arrest. The ruling resulted in new protocol for police which obligated them to read the rights to the accused, their “Miranda Rights,” before questioning, and, furthermore, any confession obtained without the suspects’ knowledge of these rights was inadmissible in court. This ruling reaffirmed protection of liberty and equality by stressing the due process regardless of education, background or wealth because it forced the state to pay for attorneys during questioning. Therefore, everyone had equality of knowledge about the law funded by the state. However, many people did not agree with granting a retrial to a rapist on a technicality, thus the decision was controversial and stimulated the vast change in American jurisprudence.
The Sixties “law and order” view of justice, strongly supported by Nixon and Reagan, made jurisprudence in the United States harsh on the accused in an effort to prevent crime. Four Supreme Court Justices, Justices Clark, Harlan, Stewart and White, who made up the dissenting opinion, express the ‘law and order’ principle in their opinion. Justice John M. Harlan, who wrote the dissenting opinion, stressed the added difficulty for law enforcement to obtain confessions, making it too easy for criminals to avoid punishment. Without the harsh treatment of suspects, Harlan argued, people will be less inclined to follow the law. Justice Byron R. White summarized the injustice of the ruling as stated, “As a consequence [of the new procedure] there will be not a gain, but a loss, of human dignity”
. Harlan also questioned the majority reading of the constitution by writing, “The court's unspoken assumption that any pressure violates the privilege is not supported by the precedents and it has failed to show why the Fifth Amendment prohibits that relatively mild pressure the Due Process Clause permits.” The dissenting opinion demonstrated the 1960s conservative public and law enforcement’s frustration with the new liberal jurisprudence, which, they believed, gave the accused too much power because the accused could end an interrogation simply by requesting a lawyer.
When police first heard Warren’s rulings, there were mixed reactions: many believed the new protocols would promote the use of science to more accurately convict rather than unjustly obtained confessions, but many thought that the new rules gave too many rights to criminals and impede law enforcement. The New York City police commissioner said, “It may have good effects because now you'll have to come up with more scientific techniques to solve crime.” District of Colombia district attorney David G. Bress agreed by adding, “Eventually the changes have to sharpen police investigations in other areas and the public will benefit” He said the ruling would, “...be good for law enforcement and make for a better brand of justice.” Together, the scientific evidence and sharper investigations will create a “better brand of justice,” which was Warren’s intent. Many police reactions, however, believed the decision would “handcuff the police” and favor suspects’ rights over public safety. New York City police officer was quoted in Time Magazine saying, “It's quite possible that a great number of persons who are in fact guilty will not be successfully prosecuted...How far and how long are the rights of the accused to be considered, with little regard for the rights of the victim?” This officer touched on the social issue of balancing accused rights victims’ rights, which was a major criticism of the ruling by those who believed that the decision infringed on victims rights by, as Philadelphia Police Commissioner Edward J. Bell claimed, “Protect[ing] the guilty.” The suspect’s power to end interrogations meant that until there was sufficient evidence for an arrest warrant, meaning more work for the police. The Boston Police Commissioner Edmund L. McNamara expressed the frustration of obtaining admissible confessions, “Criminal trials no longer will be a search for the truth, but a search for technical error.” The different opinions in the Miranda case represented the ongoing public debate about how to uphold the Constitutional rights of both victims and the accused.
Miranda demonstrated not only the American theme of liberty, but also the liberal and humanitarian shift that occurred in the 1960s during the Warren Court. It showed the growing liberal movement, granting more power to citizens and less to government, demonstrating the human rights emphasis of the era. It also amplified much of the controversy between suspects versus victims rights as seen in the polices’ wide array of reactions. Jurisprudence in the United States, because of Miranda, values foremost suspects’ right to an attorney and right against self-incrimination. Though many think it offers too much protection to suspects and “handcuffs the police
,” there is no doubt that the new system maintains the idea of “innocent until proven guilty,” ensuring only the guilty are incarcerated. The 1966 case Miranda v Arizona proved the American understanding of justice and equality while highlighting issues between balance of rights and ultimately the shift of the justice system to treat everyone equally regardless of law education, money, or race. It was able to achieve such a vast impact because of the Warren Court and has continued to play a crucial role defining the American Justice system as a system in which citizen’s rights are held above all else.…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Rights of the Accused

...Framers of the constitution made sure that the government they created would not engage in practices such as inadvertently convicting individuals of crime that they did not commit. The Bill of rights and the constitution protects individuals accused of committing crimes in the United States. Among such rights “Due Process of Law” is the protection against arbitrary deprivation of life, liberty or property that was preserved in Fifth and fourteenth amendments of the United States constitution. In simple words it states that any person who is accused of crime will be guaranteed a fair and unbiased trail in order to prove their innocence. Due process of law is again divided in to Procedural due process of law states that government must use fair proceedings and Substantial due process states that the laws under which the government acts must be constitutional. According to George, (1989), some of the protections under procedural due process are rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, rights against double jeopardy, rights against self incrimination, right to fair trail, right to counsel and right to jury trail in the civil cases. Substantial due process is often used to overthrow government actions when it interferes with individual freedom when no more specific constitutional argument can be found. Marriage and abortion laws come under substantial due process for the people of United States. The notion of Substantial due process flourished during the Franklin......

Words: 1007 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Rights of the Accused

...Rights of Accused Craig Bishop POL 110 Strayer University Professor Eaton May 2012 Due Process Due process is a set of rules that are in place to protect people’s rights, this process insure that state and federal governments do not abuse its powers and treats all fairly. Basically due process prohibits the government from taking in-appropriate actions that would take away a person’s liberty or property, without giving proper notice of any action is taken. The right to due process is in the fifth and fourteenth amendment, this is also known as the due process clause. (LawInfo, 2010) Due Process and Its Origins Due process goes back even farther. It can be traced back to the Magna Carta in 1215; the barons of England said that the powers of the King are not unlimited. They said that his powers were limited by the essential principles of justice and fairness; it also stated that the King could not seize anyone’s property indiscriminately. (Hornberger, 2005) However, the origin of due process in the United States began when Thomas Jefferson was writing the Declaration of Independence, he wanted to make sure that the rights of the people were protected. Thomas Jefferson knew from the past that a government with too much power could over run a person at their will. So he incorporated the ideas of the Magna Carta into our Constitution. (Hornberger, 2005) Over time this “Law of the Land” became “due process of the law”, in time the...

Words: 572 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Rights of the Accused

...In clause 39 of the Magna Carta, John of England said, “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.” Many a times, people have been wrongfully accused of crimes they did not commit and have faced unfair trials. The composers of the Constitution have gone to great lengths to ensure that our new government does not engage in such practice. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights now consist of a series of protections for someone who has been accused of committing a crime in the United States. The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments provide the assurance of fair procedure. The Bill of Rights gives a number of rights affordable to those who have been charged with crimes. The basis of these rights is the belief that all individuals are innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the government to justify or give reason for the arrest and detention of a suspect in a crime. A writ of habeas corpus is used to bring a prisoner or detainee before the court to determine if the imprisonment is lawful. An individual cannot be......

Words: 613 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Rights of the Accused

...Rights of the Accused Down through the years our Constitution has undergone many changes and revisions for the sake of equality. The Constitution defines the rights of a free people, whose rights and liberty are derived from their creator (Meese, 2009). After the Civil War new amendments were added to the Constitution in order to ban slavery and protect newly freed slaves. The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, implemented no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law (Wilson, 2011). The Fourteenth and the Fifth Amendment represent the right of due process. The due-process clause refers to fair procedures and equal protection of laws for all persons in the United States. The Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, also insists that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Even though this amendment applies to the federal government, the due process clause guarantees that a party will receive a fair, orderly, and just judicial proceeding (Cornwell, 2005). The Constitution prohibits all levels of government from unfairly depriving individuals of their Constitutional Rights. Due process was designed to protect the accused against abuses by the federal government. Evidence gathered illegally or unlawfully can not be used in a trial. This method refers to the exclusionary rule. This rule allows evidence that was gathered in violation to the Constitution to be excluded and not......

Words: 948 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Victim's Rights

...The 2004 Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CRVA) the has been marginally successful according to (Boland & Butler, 2009). We now see more victims being able to voice their case as a means of providing the court with the way these crimes have affected them and their families. Meaning that this act has provided victims with more rights, more treatment and services to address the violations or conditions suffered because of criminal acts, the voice of the victim is still somewhat suppressed and even excluded (2009). Often times the voice of the victim is excluded to protect the rights of the defendant. Some may argue that victims can now claim more restitution, damages or even inform sentencing by being able to attend sentencing hearings and express some thoughts and contentions, the CRVA still victimizes victims (Trueblood, 2011, p. 605). My personal stance is that I would like to see the victims' rights more favored than that of the defendant. Mostly because I feel it is the victim and their family that will suffer more than the defendant, especially in case that involves murder or homicide. Often times the defendant gets life in prison for these types of crimes and if that is the outcome the defendant and his or her family still have the ability to see one another or talk to each other. The victims never get that time back. In these types of cases I think it especially important to hold the victims' rights to a higher standard. In some ways, it is far less......

Words: 960 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Rights of the Accused

...Rights of the Accused POL110 Jeanette Ramirez Professor Rogers May 1, 2013 Introduction This paper will discuss how due process operates, in the criminal justice system. We will take an in depth look into how the due process effects the criminal justice system. However, in order for anyone to understand due process in the criminal justice, one must first know the meaning of due process. The most commonly used form of sentencing is probation, meaning the suspect is set free but under supervision of a probation officer. Define due process and its origins. According to Black’s Law Dictionary: "Due Process of law implies the right of the person affected thereby to be present before the tribunal which pronounces judgment upon the question of life, liberty, or property, in its most comprehensive sense; to be heard, by testimony or otherwise, and to have the right of converting, by proof, every material fact which bears on the question of right in the matter involved. If any question of fact or liability be conclusively presumed against him, this is not due process of law." Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, page 500. Due process is a very complex subject to try to explain and define to where it is understood. In all its complexity due process just simply means that it holds the government subservient to the land of the law. Due process originated from the Magna Carta (1215), which were the Great Charter of English liberties where the nobles limited the King’s......

Words: 1003 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

The Accused

...I’ve read this book written by John Grisham that is called The Accused. The book is about thirteen year old Theodore Boone who knows more about the law than most adult lawyers. And as a young crimefighter he never thought he would become a suspect of a crime himself. He is namely accused of a robbery after a computer turns up in his school locker, so troughout the book Theo, with the help of his uncle Ike are trying to find the real felon. Theo is really smart for his age, which has to do with that he is the son of two lawyers and that he spends most of his time in their office and in courtrooms. He is also very single-minded and knows what he stands for and what he wants to achive. One thing i remember from the book is when Theo gets permission to go to one of the biggest trials of the year, and stands before his classmates before he leaves school for it with his yellow legal pad and looked att tem as if he was a real lawyer preparing to adress the jury. Then he says "All right, Show of hands. Who thinks Pete Duffy is guilty?" Pete Being the suspect. And after almost everybody raised their hands he became furious and began to educate them about the ”presumtion of innocence” which gave me a really good picture of this little genious boy and made me want to read further about his experiences of the law. I really liked this book since it was alot about the law which I truly love, and one thing that was even better is that the author kept me guessing troughout......

Words: 294 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Parental Rights Versus State Needs

...Parental Rights versus State Needs: A History of Conflict and Compromise Historically, parents sourced their rights regarding childrearing from one outlet, themselves. In modern times, the state has taken a more active role in family issues, to include parenting. This interaction between state and individual parent has not always been harmonious. This paper will discuss the issue from both perspectives. Historical Aspect When considering American history, governments treated parental rights as a private matter that deserved interference only under special circumstances. Guidance often came from the Bible, and encouraged conduct that, in modern times, is subject to continued debate. The Book of Proverbs, as well as other writings within the Bible, provides one with substantial documentation of establishing and promoting parental rights, particularly when addressing the concept of corporal punishment. Proverbs 13:24 writes, “He that spares his rod hates his son: but he that loves him chastens him betimes” (Biblos.com, 2004, Proverbs 13:24). Proverbs 19:18 writes, “Discipline your son while there is hope, and do not desire his death” (Biblos.com, Proverbs 19:18). Proverbs 23:13-14 writes, “Withhold not correction from the child: for if you beat him with the rod, he shall not die. You shall beat him with the rod, and shall deliver his soul from hell” (Biblos.com, Proverbs 23:13-14). Proverbs 29:15 writes, “The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a...

Words: 3158 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Left Brain Versus Right Brain Learning

...Left Brain Versus the Right Brain and how This Affects Learning Elizabeth Jones College 100 American Military University Leslie Colegrove The Study of the Left Brain Versus the Right Brain and how This Affects Learning Research continues on the many studies of whether the left brain or the right brain has an impact on the way a person learns. The brain is considered to be one of the most important and complex organs in the human body. The brain is the determining factor in a person’s nature and how a person learns. Although the left and right sides of the brain process information differently, they also work hand-in-hand to process information together. Each hemisphere of a person’s brain can processes the opposite side of the body. This means that the right side of the brain has control over the left side of the body and can see what is being processed through the left eye, while the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body and can see what is being processed through the right eye. Very confusing yes, but that is how the brain works. A look into the way that the left brain and the right brain function will shed light on the impact they have on learning. Left brain learners and right brain learners are very different and prefer to learn in different styles and different environments. “The notion that our personalities, our minds, may actually reflect the workings of two usually collaborative but still separate systems—the left and the right......

Words: 1307 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

The Accused

...THE ACCUSED The movie was set 1988 and stars Kelly McGillis and Jodie Foster. It was directed by Jonathan Kaplan and the whole plot of the film was written by Tom Topor. The film is mainly set on a bar where a lot of drinking and dancing takes place. It brings out gang rape that could occur in real life situation. The rape of Cheryl Araujo took place at Big Dan’s Bar in the New Bedford, Massachusetts. The main actor, Sarah, walks into a bar stressed up after breaking up with her boyfriend as a result of drug possession issues. Dressed in a provocative manner, she walks into the bar and starts dancing. During the dancing session, she finds a young man whom she started flirting with. The scene gets worse when the young man lays her down and starts assaulting her sexually in front of many onlookers who cheer up the situation. Other two men come in and join in raping the helpless lady. At last, she finds space and escapes towards the rod yelling for help. This is a very heart touching film which portrays a lot of negative things that happen to women. The accused found a strong lawyer whom helped him to lower the extent of the case much to the dismay of Sarah. The story also portrays that rape victims could be suspects themselves in the manner in which the act takes place. Like in this case, she was dressed in a provocative manner and her dance also played a major role in the incidence. The film creates a lot of social and psychological issues such as chemical abuse and life......

Words: 339 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Victim's Rights and Vengeance

...Victim's Rights and Vengeance Charles Hill CJS/211 February 22, 2016 Janet Evans Victim's Rights and Vengeance In 1982, President Ronald Reagan the President’s task force called “Victims of Crime Act of 1984” or “VOCA.” The passage of this law in 1984 was to balance the rights of criminals and victims. The law read as “Under United States Code Title 42, the establishment of crime victims’ rights, services and compensation in law enforcement, prosecution, courts, and corrections.” (Wood, 2008). Twenty years later President George W. Bush signed in to law “Crime Victims’ Rights Act in 2004” or “CVRA”. The difference between VOCA and CVRA is basically giving the victim more rights and a bigger role in the criminal justice process. The CVRA made following rights: * The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. * The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or any release or escape of the accused. * The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding. * The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding. * The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the......

Words: 1159 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Victim's Rights and Vengeance

...Victims’ Rights and Vengeance Victims’ Rights In today’s justice system, the victims finally have a voice and a platform to be heard. I knew that victims had the right to testify however, I didn’t know that they also had any rights when it came to suspect trials. That was really interesting to me and also made me kind of happy. Just thirty year ago, victims barely had any rights to be informed, present and heard at their perpetrator’s trial. Sometimes, people often focus on the abuser and seeking justice, rather than the victim and how they feel or how they’re coping. Everyone should have the right to tell their story and be at the trial hoping that the person who violated them gets what they deserve. I believe once the trial is done and the judge sentences the abuser, the victim can have some kind of closure to what has been done to them knowing that they did everything they could to bring their abuser to justice. I absolutely agree with the victims’ rights because it gives the victims’ a voice, helps them cope and, gives them a platform to tell their story so that the next person can hear it and hopefully learn something from it. It gives them the power to share their story so that someone else who is listening will not become a victim. I believe that the Crime Victims’ Rights Act of 2004 has been very successful because it allows the victims an opportunity to make a difference in the sentencing of the suspect’s case taking back the power that the abuser may have......

Words: 370 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Punishment Versus Rehabilitation

...Punishment versus Rehabilitation AJS/502 March 17, 2012 Punishment versus Rehabilitation For centuries the criminal justice system has struggled with punishment versus rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is the belief in curing a criminal of his or her criminal tendencies. By curing the criminal of his or her tendencies, he or she will one day be cast out back into society and be a contributing member. The idea behind punishment is to deter society while giving the offender his or her just deserts. The criminal justice system is a complex machine that society has designed to rehabilitate the offender while punishing the offender. The question still remains, is punishment or rehabilitation more important, depending on the person will depend on the answer. Deterrence of Crime Deterrence is one primary objective of criminal law. The goal is to discourage members of society from committing criminal acts out of fear of punishment (Farlex, 2008). Facing the criminal justice system can be a powerful deterrent. If an individual breaks a law he or she will be apprehended, convicted, and punished (Farlex, 2008). Many researchers have begun to look at personal choice. “An understanding of personal choice is commonly based in a conception of rationality or rational choice” (Keel, 2005, para 1). Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham are early classical theorists who analyzed human behavior concepts. “The central points of this theory are: (1) The human being is a......

Words: 1696 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Rights of Accused

...Rights of Accused Maurice Paul Professor: Dr. Jane El-Yacoubi. Course: POL 110 April 29, 2012 The rights of the accused gave individual’s person the security of which papers, houses and other effects against any unreasonable searches and seizures. Which shall not be violated, as a result, no warrants will issue upon a probable causes; No individual cannot be held for a crime and or otherwise infamous crime unless that individual’s is indicted by a grand jury. Also a person cannot or subjected to the same offence twice (meaning double jeopardy). Therefore, an individual cannot be retrial after a conviction, acquittal, mistrials and multiple punishments through the state of government. Hence, a person cannot be a witness against himself/herself and cannot be deprive of life, liberty or prosperity without due process of the law which, is written in the Constitution. Also in all criminal prosecution, the person accused has the right to a speedy and public trial by a jury. The accused must be informed of the accusation and can be confronted with any witness against him/herself in the court of law. The accused can provide any witness in his/her favor and have the rights to assistance of counsel by the court if necessary in his/her defensed. These rights were written in the fourth, fifth, six and fourteen amendment to protect each individual’s even if you are not a citizen of the United State of America. Our Constitution states one law in the fifth and fourteen......

Words: 742 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Rights of Accused

...RIGHTS OF ACCUSED Assignment 1 Submitted to: Dr. Mehdi Nazer U.S. Government POL110 Prepared By: Nyleeche Perry July 26, 2012 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED Assignment 1 Define due process and its origins. Due process is a fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceeding will be fair and that one will be given notice of all the proceeding and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away ones life, liberty or property. Due process originated in 1355 in chapter 39 of the Magna Carter although some believe that it goes back farther then that. When due process was discussed in the Magna Carter, it was know as the “law of the land”. Due process is discusses in the fifth as well as the fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In the U.S. Constitution, it states that no person shall be denied the right of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law. The due process law means that a person has to be notified of any charges brought up against them. This also means that the accused person has the right to a fair hearing. Explain how due process protects the accused against abuses by the federal government. The due process clause in the Fifth Amendment was intended by the framers to prevent abuse of power on the part of the federal government. Before the Fourteenth Amendment was passed, the Bill of Rights only protected citizens from unfair treatment by the federal...

Words: 698 - Pages: 3