Legal Rights Afforded To The Accused

Legal Rights Afforded To The Accused

Introduction to Criminal Justice 101

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Legal Rights Afforded To the Accused

Name:

Institution:

 

 

Legal Rights Afforded To the Accused

In regards to the facts presented and other relevant factors, John Doe was required to be given his Miranda rights by the arresting officers. This is required under the Fifth Amendment. Miranda rights came into existence in 1966 as a result of the United States Supreme Court rule Miranda versus Arizona. Despite the fact that John is an illegal immigrant Miranda rights are part of his due process and they also apply to custodial interrogations. Therefore, in the event that he is not capable of conversing in English a translator can be accorded to him to ease the communication process. If the arresting officer did not advise John Doe on these important rights, any remarks made by the arrested individual might be suppressed during proper motion. This simply means unwarned statements cannot be used as evidence during the trial.

The Miranda ruling constitutes of communication that is initiated by law enforcers, thus the arresting officer was not required to Mirandize John Doe since the remarks he said implicated him upon his arrest. Any information offered voluntarily is admissible in court. Since he has already been arrested, the police procedural steps will be to take him to the police station and book him. Miranda rights are part of the required procedure after which he is required to sign papers acknowledging that his rights were made clear to him. After the completion of this process John Doe’s information will be taken and entered into the system (Neubauer, & Fradella, 2015). This information includes a photo of him, his fingerprints, date of birth, current address of residence and measurements of height and weight. The suspect’s fingerprints are taken to confirm his identity as well as to see whether he has any pending warrants.

 

After John has been booked he will be locked up as he waits to be arraigned. An arraignment is a process whereby an accused individual is brought before a court of competent jurisdiction and notified of the wrongdoing charged in the indictment, complaint, information or any other inculpating document, and then he or she is asked to either plead guilty or not guilty. According to different jurisdictions, arraignment can also be used by the court to decide on whether to set bail for the accused or release him or her under recognizance (Bischoff, 2010). Arraignment is required according to the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This ensures that individuals who have been accused and are in custody are not held over an extended period by authorities without being told the charge.

During the arraignment, the judge will read all criminal charges against the defendant and ask him whether he has an attorney or will need the assistance of an attorney appointed by the court. Since John is not in a position to pay for his own counsel, the court will then appoint one for him as is required under the Fifth Amendment. The defendant will then be asked by the judge how he will plead to the criminal charges against him, whether guilty or not guilty, not guilty by reason of insanity or no contest. Thereafter, the judge will decide on whether to release him on bail or own recognizance (Burnett, 2016). The last procedure will be to set the date on future proceedings such as the preliminary hearing, pre-trial motions and trial. In regards to bail the judge will consider various factors such as the evidence incriminating John, how serious the crime is considered to be, criminal history, ties to the community and any previous failures to appear before the court. According to these factors the judge will then set the bail he deems suitable.

After the arraignment the court might decide to go with a Preliminary Hearing or a Grand Jury Hearing. The only similarity between these distinct law methods is that the judge has the power to decide whether the probable cause is sufficient or the evidence against the accused is incriminating enough for a trial. During the Preliminary Hearing if the judge finds probable cause the defendant is set for a trial whereas in a Grand Jury trial setting the jury will return a formal indictment ( Neubauer & Fradella, 2015). Preliminary Hearings take place in open court and any individual can attend them, hence they are open to the public. Grand Jury proceedings on the other hand take place behind closed doors. Preliminary Hearings allow the defense and prosecution to present their evidence and cases while the Grand Jury sessions give the floor to the prosecution only. As a result Preliminary Hearings are formal and adversarial while those of the Grand Jury are informal. The Grand Jury has the power to carry out own investigations, subpoena documents and witnesses as well as to grant immunity (Otis Stephens & John Scheb, 2012)These are advantages not accorded to the judges and magistrates in a Grand Jury. 

Preliminary Hearing is advantageous in the sense that the judge can render the evidence insufficient hence make the case to be dismissed or lack of felony evidence result to the charges being reduced to a misdemeanor (Schultz, 2016). The Fifth Amendment states that everyone is entitled to a fair trial hence the Grand Jury acts as a safeguard to the defendant since judges and magistrates cannot be paid off. During the preliminary hearing the prosecution will give the defendant together with their attorney documents and police reports pertaining to the case. In conclusion, the fact that John Doe is in the United States illegally it may make the judge not to give him bail especially since he does not have community ties. Thus as a result he may be deported. Depending on the jurisdiction of New Jersey John Doe might end up have a Preliminary Hearing or a Grand Jury.

 

References

Bardes, B. A., Shelley, M. C., & Schmidt, S. W. (n.d.). American Government and Politics Today: Essentials 2017-2018 Edition.

Bischoff, H. (2010). Immigration Issues. Chicago: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Burnett, L. W. (2016). Criminal Law in America: Law Literacy Education Series. Arizona: Cop Tube America.

Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2015). America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. Phoenix: Cengage Learning.

Otis Stephens, J., & John Scheb, I. (2012). American Constitutional Law, Volume II: Civil Rights and Liberties. Phoenix: Cengage Learning.

Schultz, D. A. (2016). The Encyclopedia of American Law. New York: Infobase Publishing.

 

 

 

Place an Order

Plagiarism Free!

Scroll to Top