Preview

Criminal Justice

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
915 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Criminal Justice
ConLaw CJ 310-01
Assignment 5 (Ch.7)

1. What three requirements are necessary to trigger protection of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination? 5pts *Suspects have the right to remain silent during custodial interrogations. *Criminal defendants have a right to remain silent at their criminal trial. *In all other legal contexts, citizens have a right not to answer specific questions that might tend to incriminate them.

2. What is necessary for a statement to be considered “self-incriminating”? 5pts *A statement can be considered self-incriminating if it could lead to criminal liability in any jurisdiction. It is also giving a testimony in a trial or other legal proceeding that could subject one to criminal prosecution.

3. There are several situations in which a witness can be compelled to provide testimony that concerns his or her own criminal activity. What are they? 10pts *Testimony *Compulsion *Self-incrimination

4. What is the difference between absolute immunity and use (including derivative use) immunity? 10pts *Absolute Immunity bars the government from prosecuting the witness for crimes revealed through compelled testimony. Because the government is barred from persecuting, the testimony is no longer incriminating and may be compelled. *Use or including derivative use, immunity states the Fifth Amendment is satisfied if the government grants the witness immunity from the government’s use of the testimony and its fruits in any prosecution later brings.

5. When, if ever, can a defendant be questioned by the prosecutor at his or her criminal trial? 5pts *Criminal defendants have the right to remain silent at their trial. They invoke this right by not taking the witness stand. A defendants dedcision not to testify is final, the prosecutor is not permitted to call the defendant as a witness. If the defendant wants to anwere/ take the stand then he is allowed to, there the prosecutor can ask

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    As further reiterated, “Confessions remain a proper element in law enforcement. Any statement given freely and voluntarily without any compelling influences is, of course, admissible in evidence.” Furthermore, the Fifth Amendment does not bar voluntary statements by definition. The Fifth Amendment explicitly states “No person shall…be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”. The issue here was whether or not the conversation was in fact an interrogation based on the subdivision called the “functional equivalent” of questioning, described as ‘any words or actions on the part of the police that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect’. The court found that the conversation did not fall within the Miranda meaning of “interrogation” because it was concluded as being nothing more than a dialogue between the two officers, which invited no response from the respondent, and was clearly not a questioning initiated by officers. Furthermore, the conversation also was found not to fall under the description of “functional equivalent” because the few ‘offhand’ remarks that the officers made to one another in no way subjected the respondent to elicit a statement of admission, nor were the officers’ actions subjecting the respondent. Consequently, the respondent was found to have given a confession in a voluntary manner and that his Fifth Amendment rights were not deprived because he was not compelled or forced in any way to…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    People v. Sisuphan

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages

    “The question, before us, therefore, is whether evidence that Sisuphan returned the money reasonably tends to prove he lacked the requisite intent at the time of the taking.” Was his the Fifth Amendment right to present defense and “all pertinent evidence of significance value to that defense” violated?…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    BUS LAW QUIZ1

    • 284 Words
    • 1 Page

    7. A deposition: is the testimony of a witness taken under oath, can also be used to impeach witness, can be conducted outside coutroom…

    • 284 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Brief Fact Summary: Self-incriminating evidence was provided by the defendants while interrogated by police without prior notification of the Fifth Amendment Rights of the United States Constitution.…

    • 671 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The fifth amendment prohibits double jeopardy (del Carmen, 2014). The concept behind prohibiting double jeopardy is to protect the defendant from being tried and punished twice for a single crime, but this doesn’t mean that after a verdict is handed down the process ends (del Carmen, 2014). They can try and get an appeal so that their case and verdict will be reviewed (del Carmen, 2014).…

    • 335 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order for an admission to be admissible in court, prior to interrogation, the individual must first be informed in clear and unequivocal terms that he has the right to remain silent. In addition, the warning to remain silent must be accompanied by the explanation that anything can be used against the individual in court, and that the individual has the right to have an attorney present during interrogation, and if they can not afford one, then one will be appointed to them. Also, if the individual waives his right to remain silent and for counsel to be present, the police must show that the waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.…

    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.…

    • 402 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Supreme Court considered some of these questions in Nix v. Whiteside (1986), which addressed some of the constitutional issues raised when Whiteside’s attorney reported to the trial court judge of his belief that his client intended to commit perjury while testifying in court about events leading up to the death of the victim. Whiteside was convicted of murder, and the appeal raised the question of whether he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to assistance of counsel. The court decided that he was not, but this case raised—but did not settle—the issue of whether the attorney should have revealed this confidential information about…

    • 349 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In the Supreme Court, case Miranda v. Arizona involved an individual by the name of Ernesto Miranda and the state of Arizona. Ernesto Miranda who was accused of kidnapping and raping women was arrested by police and questioned for about two hours until policed obtain a written statement confession to the crimes (Miranda v. Arizona). In trial, the police officers admitted they did not notifying Miranda of his right to have an attorney present when being questioned about the chargers; however, Miranda was convicted by the Arizona state court and sentenced to prison. Miranda’s attorney appealed the conviction to the Supreme Court of Arizona, but the court upheld the state’s decision stating that “Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request counsel” (Miranda v. Arizona).…

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Apendix D

    • 355 Words
    • 3 Pages

    |Court jurisdiction is determined by age |The purpose of the procedures is to punish |receive Miranda warnings. |…

    • 355 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Right to Counsel

    • 1415 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The judgments of the U.S. Supreme Court also indicates that the Right to Counsel be provided to any individual who is insolvent or penniless and that the individual is guaranteed the right to the attendance of a court-appointed counsel at a crucial point in the criminal trial (2011). The crucial points of these proceedings are composed of custodial questioning, pre-charge lineups, preliminary examinations, arraignment, trial, punishment, and the first appeal of guilty verdict (2011). The Right to Counsel was initiated as a response to the English custom of refusing the aid of counsel in severe criminal proceedings that forces individuals to be present in court and represent his or herself in his or her own words (2011). An example of the strictness of the practice to deny counsel is evident in the trial of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots in 1568 (2011). Queen Mary was indicted for…

    • 1415 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Miranda Rights are part of a preventative criminal procedure rule that states law enforcement are required to administer Miranda Rights to an individual who is in custody and is subject to direct questioning for a criminal violation of law. When a person is detained or taken into custodial arrest and interrogated for a criminal offense, if he or she wishes to remain silent the individual must expressly state that he or she chooses to remain silent. In addition, if the individual asserts that he or she wishes to speak to an attorney or have an attorney present, police must then cease interrogations and wait until…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Many people think the Miranda Rights are very important to our law system. I would have to agree with this statement. We need the Miranda Rights so people being arrested know they have the right to be silent and they do not have to confess. Some people do not know the rights they have if they are uneducated in law or the constitution. The Miranda Rights are very important to our country and our people.…

    • 504 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The 5th Amendment

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages

    are expected to tell the truth, even if that truth was to put you in…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    [T]he doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity protect public officials from tort suits for discretionary acts committed within the scope of their authority.…

    • 187 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays