Preview

Fifth amendment

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
632 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Fifth amendment
Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The Fifth Amendment also refers to the practice of invoking the right to remain silent rather than incriminating oneself. It protects guilty as well as innocent persons who find themselves in incriminating circumstances. This right has important implications for police interrogations, a method that police use to obtain evidence in the form of confessions from suspects. The clauses incorporated within the Fifth Amendment outline basic constitutional limits on police procedure. The Fifth Amendment is important mainly because it protects us from having our rights abused by the government. It protects us from having the government take our freedom or our property without convicting us of a crime. It also makes it harder for the government to actually convict us of crimes. By doing these things, it helps to protect us from a tyrannical government. The framers of the Fifth Amendment intended that its provisions would apply only to the actions of the federal government. However, after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, most of the Fifth Amendment’s protections were made applicable to the states. Under the incorporation doctrine, most of the liberties set forth in the Bill of Rights were made applicable to the state governments through The U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Due Process and equal protection clauses of the fourteenth Amendment. As a result, all states must provide protection

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

    The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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
  • Good Essays

    The Fifth Amendment which in 1934 the “which protects a defendant from being compelled to be a witness against themselves” (Wright, 2013). The self-incrimination portion of the Fifth Amendment was tested case of Miranda v. Arizona. This is the same case that leads to the Miranda Warning. The Miranda warning is an “explanation of rights that must be given before any custodial interrogation” so that self-incrimination will not be a factor. No person can be compelled to openly admit to a crime. They cannot try to pry information out of someone if they have not been read their rights or if they ask for their attorney. It is a different story though is someone just starts rambling on when they are not asked. “Suspects can reinitiate an interrogation by coming forward and indicating to police they wish to talk and are willing to waive their Miranda rights. If there is a break in detention, the police may reinitiate the interrogation after fourteen days” (Wright, 2013).…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Fourth and Fifth Amendments come into play when people are initially being arrested for any crime. The Fourth Amendment protects people against unreasonable search and seizure and the Fifth Amendment gives right for the person to remain silent, and not make self-incriminating statements. The Sixth Amendment grants someone charged with a crime, right to a speedy trial by the peers of his community. Once the court knowledge’s a crime has taken place by a person, Eight Amendment, is there to protect the person being charged with excusive fine or bail. Eight Amendments also grants the person found guilty to not face “cruel or unusual punishment.” The Fourteenth Amendment is perhaps the one we don’t realize very often. But it is there, to protect non-citizens and citizens…

    • 1030 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The police duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a witness against himself," and Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney.…

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    "The history of liberty has largely been the history of observance of procedural safeguards." We agree with this quote because our country is based on the right to have our guaranteed protection of life, liberty and property. Two of the greatest procedural guarantees that insure liberty are the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. According to the Fifth Amendment, a capital crime is punishable by death, while an infamous crime is punishable by death or imprisonment. This amendment guarantees that no one has to stand trial for such a federal crime unless indicted by a grand jury. Further, a person cannot be put in double jeopardy for the same offense by the same government. The amendment also guarantees that a person cannot be forced to testify against himself, and forbids the government from taking a person's…

    • 2354 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Team Reflection Week 2

    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The fifth and 14th U. S. Constitution amendments were put into action to care of the rights of businesses and organizations. The fifth amendment supports “ No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be…

    • 613 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona was the case that altered the criminal justice system. It gives criminals the rights they do not deserve. Ernesto Miranda was the man who was responsible for the change in law enforcement. He argued that he was not informed of his rights during his arrest and his Fifth and Sixth amendments were violated. After that, the Miranda Rights were established to protect the suspect from refusing to answer self-incriminating questions and the right to an attorney. The Fifth Amendment’ s rights protection against self- incrimination and double jeopardy, and right to a grand jury indictment . The Sixth Amendment’s right to a speedy and public trial, trial by jury, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and counsel.…

    • 454 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The case of Miranda v. Arizona dealt with the question, “Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?” This case started in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for robbing $8 from a bank worker, and was charged with armed robbery. He already had a record for armed robbery, and a juvenile record including attempted rape, assault, and burglary. While Miranda was in police custody, he signed a written confession to the robbery, and also to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days before the robbery. After being convicted, Miranda’s lawyer appealed; on the basis that the defendant did not know he was protected from self-incrimination and therefore did not have to confess to his crimes.…

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The fifth amendment's privilege not to answer, critics carp, insulates the guilty defendant from revealing his complicity.' While this is true, ironically it also can…

    • 4738 Words
    • 19 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The 5th Amendment states that the government must follow the due process of the law before punishing a person and that all citizens had the right to a trial by jury. It also states that a person cannot be put on trial twice for the same crime or that person on trial for a crime does not have to testify against themselves in court - "Pleading the 5th". The reason for this addition to the Constitution was due to the British refusing to grant the same rights to American subjects as they gave to people in Great Britain. Many people were jailed without even being accused of a crime. This specifically referred to the right of a Trial by Jury and the right not incriminate themselves. The 5th Amendment is also referred to as the Double Jeopardy and…

    • 189 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Maarv, H. (2011, July 6). Can I Serve a Subpoena to Anyone if I Need Him in Court? Retrieved February 26, 2012, from ehow: http://www.ehow.com/info_8698507_can-anyone-need-him-court.html…

    • 1065 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Our Constitution has a lot of amendments. The 4th-8th really focus on fairness, kind of like the dew process system. The citizens of the United States try to use these if they get in trouble with the law.…

    • 233 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Sixth Amendment

    • 2928 Words
    • 12 Pages

    The 6th Amendment focuses completely on the rights of a person accused of committing a crime by the government. The 6th Amendment contains seven specific protections for people accused of crimes. These seven rights are: the right to a speedy trial, the right to a public trial, the right to be judged by an impartial jury, the right to be notified of the nature and circumstances of the alleged crime, the right to confront witnesses who will testify against the accused, the right to find witnesses who will speak in favor of the accused, and, the right to have a lawyer. The reasoning behind all of these protections goes back to the days of our founding fathers; when under the English law none of these rights were guaranteed. The writers of the constitution felt it was very important that all of the rights that are given under the sixth amendment were guaranteed in reaction to the blatant suppression of individual rights and liberties that were being implemented in the “colonies”. As time has passed and our constitution amended in reaction to those times, the rights guaranteed under the 6th Amendment have been strengthened and justly implemented.…

    • 2928 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays