Sixth Amendment - Essay Example

Sixth Amendment Sixth Amendment The sixth amendment ensures that a person has the right to fair trial within the shortest time possible. In the pre-trial process, the accused appears before a judge in less than 24 hours. The judiciary then cross-examines the situation to set the date for the case. The government initiates the process by filing a case against a person. Thereafter, the court summons the person for a hearing. According to Smith (2008), the person has the right to defend himself from accusation before trial.

At the courts, the person comes face to face with his accuser. After trail, the jury makes the verdict upon which the guilty persons have the right to appeal according to the sixth amendment. Following a verdict, the guilty person can file for a plea in the federal courts. This happens in situations where the accused is dissatisfied by the verdict. However, the court of appeal can accept or decline the case depending on the facts presented by the appellate (Smith, 2008). In following the right procedures, the court accords the guilty an appeal.

The person has to prove the violation of his rights and his innocence in an appeal.The Sixth Amendment right to trial by a jury enhances fairness by focusing on the inequities in application of law. It prevents impartial jurisdiction. As such, its enactment has decreased cases of violation of privileges associated with the accused. According to Smith (2008), a jury trial ensures that the judges are impartial when delivering their verdict. Consequently, the nature of the case dictates to the judges their powers in trail.

For example, judges with cases of corruption cannot sentence criminals. The judge does not have the autonomy to make decisions in a case. The jury safeguards the privileges of the accused regardless of the crime committed.Before trail, the accused should know the person who is accusing them. The law gives the accused an opportunity to face complainant in a court. To some extent, the accuser cross-examines the person he/she is accusing. Historically statements outside courts influenced decision in English courts.

Therefore, the enactment of the right to confront witness ensured that the judge is not lead by the sentiments made outside courts. The 12-member jury was constituted because of its benefits to the judiciary and the public. It also safeguarded the constitution of the United States. It was an impartial body because it enhanced fairness during the reign of Charlemagne. Consequently, I agree with the privilege to a trial because it enhances fairness. It allows for the cross examination before the accused is sentenced.

Additionally, it provides different perspective to justice. The court disallows hearsay because it denies the defendant a chance to confront his accusers. Anonymity of the person who has made the sentiments makes it difficult for court to enhance fair trials. There is no cross examination by the jury (Smith, 2008). Additionally, hearsay presents evidence without facts. The decision of the Supreme Court in Brady v. U.S made it difficult for the people who plead guilty to overturn their sentiments.

ReferencesSmith, R. (2008). Sixth Amendment: The right to a fair trial. Edina, MN: ABDO Pub. Co.