Brown Vs. Mississippi And Maranda V. Arizona Essay

948 Words Oct 27th, 2015 4 Pages
Historically, there have been cases that either change laws, or challenge laws to define their scope. Two such cases are Brown v. Mississippi and Maranda v. Arizona. In both cases, laws were neither changes, nor expanded upon, but rather experienced a definition of their scope and the governments obligation to those arrested. The following essay will be inclusive of background information for both cases, the courts decisions on the petitions, and an analytical review of the impact of these laws, concerning law enforcement. The case of Brown v. Mississippi is a case filed by petitioner who were found guilty at trial, based only on their confession. Confessions that the Petitions testified were coercion with physical torture. The Petitioners argued that that the confessions were false, and only given under duress, as a result of the torture, which they argued was a violation of their 14th Amendment rights. The trial court’s judgment was upheld by the Mississippi Supreme Court who concluded that “(1) that immunity from self- incrimination is not essential to due process of law; and (2) that the failure of the trial court to exclude the confessions after the introduction of evidence showing their incompetency, in the absence of a request for such exclusion, did not deprive the defendants of life or liberty without due process of law; and that even if the trial court had erroneously overruled a motion to exclude the confessions, the ruling would have been mere error reversible…

Related Documents