Right to Counsel: Critical Stages of Criminal Proceedings - Assignment Example

The Right to Counsel Number Right to counsel The right to attorney refers to the Six Amendment right ofany criminal defendant to effective legal assistance throughout the important stages of their trial. The critical stages include; post-arrest questioning, line-ups, other identification processes, pre-trial hearings, arraignments and plea negotiations. The fundamental right also envisages the fact that some defendants do not have the resources to hire a legal defense counsel, and thus responds by obligating the government to assign one for every defendant or settle the legal expenses incurred by such defendants.

In the landmark case of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the US Supreme Court ruled that the right to attorney is important during the interrogation of criminal suspects. As such, any statements given by the suspect will only be admitted as evidence in their trial if the accused was reasonably informed about his or her right to attorney, but opted to forego the right (Regan, 2013). In a similar case of Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977), the US Supreme Court was prompted to define waiver of one’s right to attorney, in which case, the Court ruled that the defendant did not waive his right to attorney during the interrogation, especially when, behind his lawyer’s back, police interrogations led the defendant to issue some implicating evidence against himself.

In the case of United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967), the US Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional right to attorney covers a lineup conducted after pressing charges against the party in question (Regan, 2013). The ruling aimed to ensure that legal counsel contributed to the proper constitution of lineups for purposes of an impartial trial. An effective defense lawyer would press for the removal of suggestive elements in lineups. Moore v. Illinois, 434 U.S. 220 (1977) extended defendants’ right to attorney to any other important identification procedures, which could be mishandled to the detriment of the defendant.

In Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (1970), Coleman (defendant) was denied access to attorney services during the preliminary stages of the hearing. However, the evidence collected therefrom was expunged at trial (Regan, 2013). The Appellate Court ruled that even though the defendant was denied the opportunity to cross-examine the evidence presented against him through counsel, his defense did not suffer any prejudice because the evidence was not used in against him at trial. Apart from preliminary hearings, the Supreme Court underscored the right to attorney during arraignment in the case of Hamilton v.

Alabama, 368 U.S. 52 (1961), where it overturned the life sentence for the defendant (Regan, 2013). The Court observed that Hamilton’s denial of the right to attorney violated his Due Process rights. Finally, the right to attorney is also important during plea bargains. This was evidenced in McMann v. Richardson, 397 US 759 (1970), where defendant Richardson single-handedly made incriminating confessions followed by a guilty plea. The Court ruled that the defendant’s statements would not suffice, because unlike a lawyer, he did not have the knowledge about their implications.

Similarly, in Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970), the United States Supreme Court declined prayers that substantial sentencing waivers and threats of capital punishment were adequate proof of coercion (Regan, 2013). Conclusion The right to legal representation is generally considered as an important part of the right to an impartial trial under the Sixth Amendment to the US constitution. As such, criminal defendants have the right to an effective counsel of their choice from investigations through to sentencing.

These stages include; interrogations in police custody, arraignments and plea bargains. In these important stages, a legal counsel is the only party having the capacity to make reasonable judgments and interventions that would ensure an impartial trial of the defendant.ReferenceRegan, T., (2013). The Proper Borders of Padilla: Courts Must Avoid Over-Expansion Of Sixth Amendment Claims. St. Johns Law Review, 87(2/3), 669-700.