Chapter 14 Section 3

Chapter 14 Section 3 The Rights of the Accused

What are the two rights protected in the 4th Amendment? • right to privacy (people and possessions wherever they have a legitimate right to expect privacy) • protection against unlawful search and seizures, applies to police officers, law-enforcement officials, and government workers • What must the police have to search your property? • warrant: a court order that authorizes law-enforcement officials to make an arrest, search a person or place, or take property as evidence

What are the three steps police officers must follow to obtain a warrant? • appear before a judge to apply for a warrant • police must swear under oath that they have probable cause • probable cause: a reasonable belief that a particular crime has been or is being committed • the judge must issue a warrant that describes the exact place to be searched, the specific persons or items to be seized • What are the specific cases where searches without a warrant are allowed? • if the police believe that the suspect will escape, destroy evidence, or harm others • if the suspect is armed • if there is “reasonable suspicion” that a crime is about to take place • if the suspect is going to flee • searches by airport inspectors, border patrol, customs agents, school administrators, or teachers (only need suspicion)

What was the issue in Weeks v. United States? What was the Supreme Court’s ruling? What is the exclusionary rule? • Federal agents arrested Weeks and searched his home without a warrant and seized his property. Letters and documents taken from his home were used to convict him of a crime (sending lottery ticket through the mail). The Supreme Court overturned the decision because the evidence used to convict him had been obtained without a warrant. • exclusionary rule: the principle that evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in federal court cases • How did Mapp v. Ohio extend the exclusionary rule? How was it enforced? • applied search and seizure to the states and state courts, exclusionary rule included in the 4th Amendment and the 14th Amendment applies it to the states

Does the use of modern technology to gather criminal evidence violate the 4th Amendment? • telephone wiretaps, “bugs”, surveillance with hidden cameras or tape recorders • police argue these are valuable weapons for fighting criminals • depends on the interpretation of the 4th Amendment • What are the limits on surveillance? • Katz v. United States, eavesdropping does not have to involve physical trespassing to violate the 4th Amendment, the 4th Amendment “protect people, not places”, made a valid warrant necessary for electronic surveillance

What does the 6th Amendment guarantee? • fair trial, speedy trial before an impartial jury, accused can be represented by a lawyer, face prosecution witnesses, and call witnesses of their own • Why is the right to legal counsel important? • people untrained in law would have little to no chance of proving their innocence • applies to one charged with any federal crime • Gideon v. Wainwright • June 1961, Gideon was arrested and charged with breaking into a poolroom in Panama City, Florida and stealing beverages and money • Gideon was too poor to hire a lawyer and the court refused to appoint him one, he was convicted and sentenced to five years • after studying law, hand-wrote an appeal to the Supreme Court • the Court overturned Gideon’s conviction because he had been denied counsel

What was the affect of the Gideon case? • all levels of government provide legal counsel for those who cannot afford it • public defenders: a lawyer employed by the state and appointed by the court to defend individuals who cannot afford legal aid • people may not be sent to jail without legal counsel, felony or misdemeanor • Does the promise of legal counsel apply to police investigation and questioning before a trial? • 1964, Escobedo v. Illinois, Danny Escobedo charged with murder of brother-in-law, interrogated for hours without a lawyer present, the incriminating statements made during this time led to his conviction • the Supreme Court ruled that when questioning turns from investigatory to accusatory, the accused is entitled to an attorney, overturned Escobedo’s conviction

What was the effect of the Escobedo ruling? • raised questions, should suspects be informed of their rights • Miranda v. Arizona, 1966, Ernesto Miranda was mentally ill who raped and kidnapped an 18 year old woman, was interrogated for two hours without a lawyer and confessed, the confession was used as evidence to convict him • the Supreme Court overturned the ruling combining the 5th Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination and 6th Amendment guarantee of right to counsel • What was the result of the Miranda ruling? • the Supreme Court set up strict guidelines called the Miranda Warnings • prior to questioning, suspects must be told • right to remain silent • if they give up the right to remain silent, anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law • they have the right to consult with a lawyer before and during questioning • their failure to request legal counsel does not mean they give up the right to counsel • counsel will be appointed if they cannot afford legal fees

What rights does the 8th Amendment guarantee? • limits on excessive fines and bail • limits on cruel and unusual punishment • What is the controversy over the 8th Amendment? • death penalty • innocent until proven guilty is enforced through the 8th Amendment • no one may be placed in jail before proven guilty • bail can be posted to be released to prepare for trial • Furman v. Georgia: the death penalty, as it was, violated the 8th and 14th Amendments, but did not outlaw the death penalty itself • -leaving it up to the states if they want to reenact the death penalty • -as long as it is given objectively and non-discriminatory standards were met

Chapter 14 Section 3