The Importance Of Self-Incrimination In The Fifth Amendment

Superior Essays
The Fifth Amendment provides citizens with the opportunity to not be a witness in their own trial so that the possibility of self-incrimination is diminished. The self-incrimination clause protects defendants, but can be misconstrued at times as an admission of guilt by the defendant. There are several cases that have had to deal with the issue of self-incrimination, including Salinas v. Texas 570 US __ (2013) and Mitchell v. United States 526 US 314 (1999).
Salinas v. Texas 570 US __ (2013) FACTS: In the case of Salinas v. Texas 570 US __ (2013), a double homicide investigation in Houston, Texas in 1992 led officers to believe that Genovevo Salinas was a suspect in the murders (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, n.d.). Mr. Salinas then accompanied
…show more content…
The Court also decided that the District Court imposed an impermissible burden on the right against compelled self-incrimination by hold Mitchell’s silence against her at the sentencing hearing.
CASE SIGNIFICANCE: This case is significant because it decides that a guilty plea does not mean a defendant waives their right to the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause. It allows the defendant to remain silent and for law enforcement officers to rely on the facts of their case to get the conviction. It also advises the courts that a defendant’s silence cannot be used against them to draw an adverse inference or see it as an admission of guilt. Amanda Mitchell entered a guilty plea in her case involving the distribution of cocaine. According to the District Court, this guilty plea waived her right to remain silent during the sentencing hearing. She was later sentenced under the 10-year minimum mandatory sentence. Mitchell did not testify and it was later decided by the Supreme Court that a defendant’s silence cannot be used to draw an adverse inference in reference to the circumstances of their case. It also decided that a guilty plea does not waive the right to remain silent (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law,

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The Miranda Rights help protect citizens fifth and sixth amendments. The fifth amendment protects citizens from being forced to be witness against himself, while the sixth amendment assures that those arrested have a right to a public and speedy trial (Doc E). Together, the fifth amendment protects against self-incrimination and the sixth amendment assures that those arrested can not be held in jail indefinitely. The Miranda Warning read by officers specifically states that after one is made aware of their Miranda Rights, any confession or statements can be used against oneself lawfully (Doc J). Consequently, the Miranda ruling assures that one is fully aware of their rights and are also aware of the consequences if they choose to self-incriminate after being read their…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This case mainly references the Fifth Amendment, the right against self-incrimination. In the case, Malloy, a petitioner, was sentenced to one year in jail for unlawful gambling. After 3 months, however, he was released from jail and put on probation for 2 years. While malloy was on probation, he was asked to testify to a state inquiry into gambling and other criminal-related activities that Malloy was involved in. When he heard this, he declined to testify and answer their questions because it would have incriminated…

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Question 1 A. 370 U.S. 660: Robinson v. California (No. 554) Argued: April 17, 1962- Decided: June 25, 1962 The case involved Robinson and the state of California. He had violated Californian statute that prohibited addiction to narcotics (Uscourtsgov, 2018). The statute termed it a misdemeanor punishable by any person arrested with addiction to drugs, and, sustained the petitioner’s imprisonment thereunder the Californian courts. The constitutional amendments that were under scrutiny, in this case, were Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments Pp.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The fifth amendment is part of the bill of rights in which each amendment specifies not only our rights but our protections against the government when needed. It is stated within the amendment that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…”. Similarly, it is also divided into three separate clauses that enhance the major phases when dealing in a criminal investigation and prosecutions. The first one is the grand jury, secondly right to self-incrimination, and finally double jeopardy. The way it came to be in this order was due to not only history, but by also the clarification Alfredo Garcia initiated.…

    • 1912 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Fifth Amendment

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Arizona, which ruled that the inculpatory and exculpatory evidence brought against a defendant at trial is only admissible if the defendant has been informed of his right against self-incrimination as well as his right to consult with an attorney. This Supreme Court decision was brought about by the conviction of Ernesto Miranda, who provided a confession to police without being informed of his right to counsel and his right to remain silent. The Arizona State Supreme Court upheld the conviction, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that because he had not been informed of his rights, his rights had not been properly upheld. The key to this decision is the distinction between an informed waiving of those rights, and an uninformed waiving of those rights. If a person is convicted based on self-incrimination, the prosecution must be able to prove that they were explicitly aware of and subsequently waived their rights.…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The sixth amendment, which is the right to counsel is used to ensure fairness across the board. A right to counsel is needed to avoid unjust convictions as well as to protect the individual’s rights. Every defendant is entitled to counsel. Counsel is automatically provided to those who are facing the death penalty, are illiterate, or don’t have enough money to pay for one themselves. The sixth amendment guarantees the right to waive assistance of counsel and conduct one's own defense.…

    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Powell V. Alabama Case

    • 808 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments were established to protect the rights of the suspected, the accused, criminal defendants and that of convicted criminals. There have been several instances of the course time where these protections of rights haven’t been upheld. An example of when these protections of rights have been neglected is the Powell v. Alabama in 1932. There are several things that made this particular case so different from that of other cases. The time period, the series of events in the case, and the doctrines that were established during this time period are just a few to mention.…

    • 808 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    I choose to do my research paper on one of my favorite court cases in American history Miranda vs. Arizona case. I’m choosing this court case because it brings up two amendments that tend to be overlooked by law enforcement comes around and one of the most well-known sayings. First I will be giving a quick background about those two amendments and then I will start talking about the case. The issues about this case involved the fifth and sixth amendment. Let me explain both of these amendments.…

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Salinas Vs Texas Summary

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages

    2) A witness may not use the Fifth Amendment to avoid giving testimony he does not want to give. 3) Invoking the Fifth Amendment makes known to the Government that a witness intends on using this right. Holding – The state court, Court of Appeals, and Court of Criminal Appeals were not in error because a witness does not invoke rights by merely remaining silent and petitioner was required to declare the right in order to protect his interests. Rationale – The court deduced that invoking the Fifth Amendment requires the proper action on the part of the person choosing to use it and proper channels exist to make these indications known for those choosing to invoke such rights.…

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Do I think the 5th Amendment protects someone’s refusal to answer police questions when he hasn’t been arrested or read his rights? In my opinion, no, the 5th Amendment does not protect you from questioning. The judges over the Salinas v. Texas court case decided that the 5th Amendment's advantage against self-incrimination doesn’t work for people who just decide to silence themselves while being questioned. You have to claim your 5th amendment right to be able to use it.…

    • 251 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Ringo V. State (1986)

    • 631 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Supreme Court’s decision involved the Fourteenth Amendment along with a multitude of other cases in order to examine the totality of the circumstances. The court agreed with the Court of Appeals decision implying that a confession would aid Bond’s case and the detective promising to put Bond in contact with his family did not induce an involuntary confession. However, the detective’s statement that Bond would not receive a fair trail because of his race and the prospective jury makes the court condemn the intentional misrepresentation of judicial rights in order to convince a suspect in a criminal case to confess. In the cases of Ringo v. State (1879) they referenced the quote, “The critical injury is whether the defendant’s statements were…

    • 631 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Sixth Amendment simply ensured that the defendant in a federal criminal case who could afford to hire counsel would be entitled to appear through a lawyer, rather than being forced to defend himself. The U.S Supreme Courts and the State Supreme Courts came to an agreement that the government should provide lawyer to the vast majority of criminal defendants who cannot afford to hire a lawyer. According to Worrall the United State V. Wade (388 U.S.2189 (1967)) “The presence of counsel is necessary to preserve the defendant’s basic right to a fair trial”.…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The right to remain silent is located in Fifth Amendment, and the right to have a presence of attorney is located in the Sixth Amendment of the constitution. The Supreme Court ended up ruling that it was unconstitutional to undertake the interrogation without the warning of the rights secured by the Fifth Amendment. Additionally, the court stated that they must protect the individual from the desire to self-incriminate ("Miranda v."). The court created the Miranda Warning which is as follows: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Fifth Amendment was written to protect the rights of individuals against tyrannical government. When a citizen went to court said person would have to answer any and every question thrown at them. The court wouldn’t even have to tell the prosecuted what the charge(s) where and what evidence was collected. So the ‘guilty’ citizen would think they wouldn’t need a lawyer and could end up self-incriminating themselves. The government could also torture one and one could be automatically guilty if they had remanded silent.…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Because so many rights were based on theories or strong beliefs by men such as John Locke and Thomas Paine, people could be tortured in custody for not confessing because they had little rights. Due to these wild government procedures, English citizens stood up against this injustice and created the basis for the self-incrimination clause, claiming they had a God given right not to testify in these situations. These simple actions of uprising were the basis for what is known as the right to go against testifying against oneself, which America's Founding Fathers formalized as a clause in the Fifth…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays