The Rights of the Accused
Key Terms
exclusionary rule, counsel, self-incrimination,
double jeopardy
Find Out
• What constitutes unreasonable searches and
seizures by the police?
• In the 1960s, how did the Supreme Court rule on
the right to counsel and self-incrimination cases?
The Rights of the Accused
Understanding Concepts
Civil Rights How have Supreme Court rulings both
expanded and refined the rights of the accused as
described in the Constitution?
Section Objective
Summarize the rights of Americans accused
of crimes.
Prior to the Court ruling on Mapp v. Ohio,
which banned the use of illegally obtained
evidence at criminal trials in state courts,
the exclusionary rule had applied only to
federal courts.
I. Searches and Seizures (pages 398–401)
A. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights
protect the rights of accused persons.
B. The Fourth Amendment offers protection
from unreasonable searches and seizures,
but the courts have dealt with this issue on a
case-by-case basis.
C. Today most police searches are conducted
with a court warrant.
I. Searches and Seizures (pages 398–401)
D. The 1914 exclusionary rule restricts the use
of illegally obtained evidence.
E. Supreme Court rulings in 1985 and 1987
limited the warrant requirement for legally
stopped cars and for students and their
property in school.
F. In 1967 the Supreme Court reversed an
earlier ruling permitting wiretapping. In
1968 Congress passed a statute requiring
a court order before using wiretapping to
obtain evidence.
I. Searches and Seizures (pages 398–401)
Critics of the exclusionary rule argue that it
weakens the power of courts to protect
citizens from violent criminals. Do you
agree? Explain.
Answers will vary. See discussion of
exclusionary rule on text pages 399–400.
II. Guarantee of Counsel (pages 401–402)
A. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a
defendant the right to an attorney.
B. In federal cases, courts generally provide
an attorney for defendants who cannot
afford one.
C. State courts must also provide attorneys
for defendants.
II. Guarantee of Counsel (pages 401–402)
Why is it significant that the Court ruled that
criminal defendants have a right to a lawyer?
Many prisoners who had been convicted
without counsel were set free.
III. Self-Incrimination (pages 402–404)
A. The Fifth Amendment protects witnesses
before grand juries and congressional
investigating committees.
B. The Fifth Amendment also protects
defendants against forced confessions.
C. The Escobedo (1964) and Miranda (1966)
decisions expanded the protections of
persons arrested as suspects in a
criminal case.
III. Self-Incrimination (pages 402–404)
Why should persons accused of crimes
be informed of their rights when they
are arrested?
To protect the accused from self-incrimination.
IV. Double Jeopardy (pages 404–405)
A. The Fifth Amendment protects accused
persons from double jeopardy, or being
tried twice for the same crime; a person may
be tried more than once for the same act,
however, when a crime violates both a
federal and a state law.
B. It is not double jeopardy if a single act
involves more than one crime; a
defendant may be tried for each offense.
In case of a hung jury, a second trial is not
double jeopardy.
IV. Double Jeopardy (pages 404–405)
How does the Fifth Amendment protect
persons accused of crimes from
double jeopardy?
It prohibits retrying accused persons.
V. Cruel and Unusual Punishment (page 405)
A. The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and
unusual punishment.
B. Use of the death penalty is an ongoing
controversy under this amendment.
V. Cruel and Unusual Punishment (page 405)
V. Cruel and Unusual Punishment (page 405)
Do courts consider the death penalty
cruel and unusual punishment?
Not in most cases.
Checking for Understanding
1. Main Idea Use a graphic organizer like the one
below to analyze the significance of the Gideon,
Escobedo, and Miranda cases.
Gideon: guaranteed the right to counsel;
Escobedo: limited self-incrimination;
Miranda: expanded protection of the accused
Checking for Understanding
Match the term with the correct definition.
___
D exclusionary rule
A. an attorney
___
A counsel
B. testifying against oneself
___
B self-incrimination
___
C double jeopardy
C. retrial of a person who
was acquitted of the
same crime in a
previous trial
D. a law stating that any
illegally obtained
evidence cannot be
used in a federal court
Checking for Understanding
3. Identify Fourth Amendment, Sixth Amendment,
Fifth Amendment, Eighth Amendment.
The Fourth Amendment guarantees “the right of people
to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right
“to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
The Fifth Amendment says that no one “shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
against himself.”
The Eighth Amendment forbids “cruel and unusual
punishments” and is the only constitutional provision
specifically limiting penalties in criminal cases.
Checking for Understanding
4. What procedure must police follow in making a
lawful search?
Police must state under oath that they have
probable cause to search, and then they must
obtain a warrant. Special warrantless
situations also exist.
Critical Thinking
5. Identifying Alternatives What decisions does
the accused person have to make at the time he
or she hears the Miranda rules?
An accused person has to decide whether to
say anything or remain silent. If the accused
decides to talk, he or she must decide whether
or not to ask for an attorney to be present.
Civil Rights Would you be willing to
undergo routine random drug testing or
locker searches in your school? Note
that the Fourth Amendment right to
privacy is at issue here. Create a slogan
explaining your position and use it to
create a one-page advertisement
promoting your position.