Case Studies

Case Studies

Case Studies

Case 1:

As it has been discussed in fifth Amendment, the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of confessions and the right to counsel under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, that stem from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of their freedom of action in any significant way, unless the prosecution demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination.

The following procedures to safeguard the Fifth Amendment privilege must be observed: The person in custody must, before interrogation, be clearly informed that they have the right to remain silent, and that anything they say will be used against them in court; the person in custody must be clearly informed that they have the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with them during interrogation, and that, if the person in custody is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent them.

But as it has been seen that when the police arrived, Jeff made a complete confession and inquired how the injured store guard was doing in the hospital and noone inform him that he can remains silent.

Under the Fifth Amendment, when a person is taken into custody, and when the person is questioned by the police, the person has a right to an attorney. This practice by the police is called interrogation.

If the person in custody indicates, before or during interrogation, that they wish to remain silent, the interrogation must cease. If the person in custody states that they want an attorney, the questioning must cease until an attorney is present. The police fail to stop the interrogation after an attorney is demanded; any subsequent statement made by the person may be inadmissible at a trial. When a person demands an attorney during questioning, the police cannot ask any further questions of the person. The police also cannot make any further statements or comments that might elicit a response from the person. When a person demands an attorney during interrogation, the police must stop the interrogation, even if the person is not able to obtain an attorney. As it has been mentioned in this case Jeff has some mental problem and he has been treated so at the time of confession he confessed what ever he had done so it can be said it was a voluntary confession and it should be admitted.

Case 2:

In this case the man has the right to know the charges against him self. Defendant has the right to communicate by telephone with his attorney or family or friend or bondsman as soon after you are brought to the police station as practical. In this case Sheriff Bustem has a right to complete his booking procedures before man is allowed to use the telephone. If there is a reasonable suspicion that any one may be involved ...