[In criminal law the most significant body in history is the Supreme Court. It is known as the “highest court in the land”. The landmark cases heard by the court are carefully chosen by the esteemed justices. The choices are usually based on cases where there are violations to an individuals’ Constitutional rights. In this paper, the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments will be examined, and the safeguards they provide. In addition, how the amendments impact the juvenile and adult court in day to day operations.
[The Fourth Amendment [The fourth amendment protects a citizen from unwarranted search and seizure (Cornell, 2016). The amendment states; “it is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” (Cornell, 2016).
[A significant case involving the fourth amendment was Weeks v. United States, 1914. In the Weeks case the Kansas City, Missouri police department entered the home of Mr. Weeks by using a hidden key they …show more content…
Arizona (1966). In the case Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for kidnapping and rape, after two hours of interrogation by the police the suspect confessed to the crime. During the interrogation Miranda was never informed of his right against self-incrimination, or his right to an attorney. At the trial the confession was used as evidence against him, he was convicted and sentenced to a twenty-thirty years in prison. The case was heard by the Arizona Supreme Court which upheld the conviction, the case then went to the U.S. Supreme Court who overturned the conviction. The Supreme Court decision concluded that Miranda’s rights were violated and hence the term Miranda warning was
[The Fourth Amendment [The fourth amendment protects a citizen from unwarranted search and seizure (Cornell, 2016). The amendment states; “it is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” (Cornell, 2016).
[A significant case involving the fourth amendment was Weeks v. United States, 1914. In the Weeks case the Kansas City, Missouri police department entered the home of Mr. Weeks by using a hidden key they …show more content…
Arizona (1966). In the case Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for kidnapping and rape, after two hours of interrogation by the police the suspect confessed to the crime. During the interrogation Miranda was never informed of his right against self-incrimination, or his right to an attorney. At the trial the confession was used as evidence against him, he was convicted and sentenced to a twenty-thirty years in prison. The case was heard by the Arizona Supreme Court which upheld the conviction, the case then went to the U.S. Supreme Court who overturned the conviction. The Supreme Court decision concluded that Miranda’s rights were violated and hence the term Miranda warning was