Rights of the Accused

Do Now
• Collect a sheet from the back of the room
Rights of the Accused:
4th & 5th Amendment
Rights of the Accused
• The Constitution protects the innocent and
the guilty.
• Error is inevitable:
- guilty escape punishment
- guilty are punished more severely than
they should be
- guilty are punished less severely than
they should be
- innocent are punished
4th Amendment
Unreasonable searches and seizures
Probable case
Exclusionary Rule – evidence that is
unlawfully seized is inadmissible at trial.
Core 4th Amendment Cases
• Weeks v U.S. - evidence illegally seized by a federal official
cannot be used in federal court
• Elkins v U.S. - evidence that is unlawfully seized by any
official cannot be used in federal court; the exclusionary rule
is applied to the federal courts
• Mapp v Ohio – Exclusionary Rule applied to the states
• Wolf v Colorado - the Court held that the Fourteenth
Amendment did not subject criminal justice in the states to
specific limitations and that illegally obtained evidence did
not have to be excluded from trials in all cases
• What did the exclusionary rule accomplish?
• Evidence that has been illegally obtained cannot
be used in court
Search Warrant
Detailed, factual probable cause
Testified to by a creditable observer
Specify the address to be searched
Specify the evidence to be seized
Specify the date and time
Specify who will execute the warrant
Signed by a judicial officer
Wilson v Arkansas: even when armed with a
the police generally must "knock and announce"
before entering a home.
5th Amendment
Notification of charges in advance
Formal hearing
Opportunity to hear and respond to charges
Opportunity to confront and cross examine
• Opportunity to present evidence in your own
5th Amendment…continued
Free from self-incrimination
Right to counsel
Formal ruling on the record
An appellate review procedure
Cannot twice be held in jeopardy
Miranda v Arizona
Suspects must be informed of their basic rights at
the point of arrest, particularly the right to remain
Silent, and the right to have counsel present during
any interrogations.
All confessions admitted in court must meet the
two-fold Miranda tests of:
▫ Voluntariness
▫ Awareness
• What did Miranda v Arizona accomplish?
• It made it mandatory for suspects to be aware of
their basic rights at the time of their arrest
Miranda Warnings
• You have the right remain silent
• Anything you say can and will be used as
evidence against you in a court of law
• You have a right to consult with a lawyer and to
have the lawyer present during questioning
• If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be
obtained for you if you so desire
• Do you understand these rights?
• Do you wish to have an attorney?
• Do you wish to speak to us now?
Miranda Offspring
Arizona v. Fulminante - the erroneous admission
of a coerced confession at trial does not constitute
grounds for an automatic mistrial, rather the
totality of the circumstances is to be applied to the
harmless error rule
Edwards v. Arizona - once a suspect in police custody
invoke their right to counsel, law enforcement officials
must cease their questioning with regard to the current
case and any other case until counsel is present, even if
the suspect later agrees to talk without an attorney present
Miranda Exceptions
Inevitable discovery (Nix v. Williams)
Public safety
Routine traffic stops
Previously informed of rights (an exemption to
the awareness prong)
• Illegally obtained confessions may be used to
impeach the defendant’s testimony at trial
(Michigan v. Harvey; an extension of U.S. v.
Sherman v. U.S. - if the criminal conduct is the
product of government agent creativity/if the
government induced the individual to commit a
crime that they otherwise would not have
committed, the government action would be
considered entrapment and the individual would be
free from any criminal liability for the act in
Exit Ticket
• How has the judicial interpretation worked out
in favor for the accused (using amendments 4 &
5)(3 sentence minimum)?