210 likes | 310 Views
The Criminal Amendments: Rights of the Accused Trends Over Time. Amendments 4 , 5, 6 & 8. Procedural Due Process:. Constitutional requirement that government must follow proper legal procedures before a person can be legitimately punished for an offense. In simple terms:.
E N D
The Criminal Amendments:Rights of the Accused Trends Over Time Amendments 4, 5, 6 & 8
Procedural Due Process: Constitutional requirement that government must follow proper legal procedures before a person can be legitimately punished for an offense.
In simple terms: • Protection from wrongful: • Arrest • Conviction • Punishment • These protections are in the Bill of Rights • Article I, Section 9: habeas corpus • Suspect has the right to know the specific reason for their detainment, and they can challenge their detention
Suspicion Phase: Unreasonable Search and Seizure Amendment 4
“The right of the people to be secure . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures . . . but upon probable cause . . .” • Trend: the standard the police must meet in order to search has been diminished over time • Is it legal for police to stop a car for a minor traffic infraction when their real motive is to search the car? • Is it legal for police to stop motorists at roadblocks? • Is it legal for police to use thermal imaging devices to scan homes for what might be illegal drug production? • Is it legal for school officials to require drug tests of high school students? • Is it legal for officers to seize evidence from a scene where the arrest warrant has expired?
Case Study: Mapp v. Ohio 1961 • Ms. Mapp was charged and convicted of obscene materials gained through an illegal search of her home. • The Court had to decide whether materials gained from an illegal search were admissible as evidence in court. • The Supreme Court said that materials gained through an illegal means are not admissible as evidence. This is known as the exclusionary rule.
Arrest Phase: Protection Against Self-Incrimination Amendment 5
Cannot “be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” • Coerced confessions are not legal • But some harsh interrogation techniques are legal • Accusations • Yelling • Invading personal space • Lying about evidence • Telling a suspect they failed a polygraph test
Case Study: Miranda v. Arizona 1966 • Ernesto Miranda confessed to kidnapping and rape without being notified of his freedom from self-incrimination and right to counsel. • The Court had to decide whether police needed to inform suspects of their rights before interrogation begins. • The Court decided that prosecutors could not use statements made before a suspect was notified of his rights. • Notification must be made when the suspect is in custody and before interrogation.
Trial Phase: The Right to a Fair Trial Amendment 6
Case Study: Gideon v. Wainwright: 1963 • Gideon was arrested for burglarizing a pool hall. He was not given assistance of counsel for his defense. • The Court had to decide whether depriving a suspect of an attorney in a non-capital case deprived the suspect of his Sixth Amendment rights. • The Court sided with Gideon; they said the right to an attorney for a non-capital case is essential to due process.
Trend Alert: • Incorporated rights for the accused were largely expanded during the Warren Court (1953-1969) • Court decisions have greatly narrowed the exclusionary rule • Search protections have narrowed over time; Individuals’ freedom from unreasonable search has diminished over time
Sentencing Phase: Cruel and Unusual Punishment Amendment 8
Death Penalty • Trend: Narrowed use over time • Outlawed for: • Juveniles • People with mental retardation • People who are clinically insane
War on Terror Detention of Enemy Combatants
Should individuals suspected of terrorist acts be informed of their rights?
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 2004 • Hamdi is an American citizen, arrested in Afghanistan and detained in the US. Hamdi, who was being held indefinitely, was not given access to an attorney or a trial court. • The Court had to decide whether Hamdi, an “enemy combatant,” had been deprived of his ??? • The Court decided that Hamdi’s Fifth Amendment protections of due process were violated.
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2006 • Hamdan, bin Laden’s chauffeur, was held and tried by a secret military tribunal • The Court had to decide whether the military tribunals were constitutional. • The Court ruled that the tribunals were unlawful because they did not provide even minimal protections detainees’ rights.
War on Terror Trend • Increased presidential (executive branch) authority • Diminished civil liberties, especially during times of intense security needs
Summary: • Overall, have we gained or lost civil liberties over time? • Selective incorporation has increased individuals liberties over time. • During times of war, liberties are often diminished. • The courts are constantly striking a balance between individual rights and the need for public order.