United Sates Bill of Rights 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment Criminal Rights - Term Paper Example

 Introduction On September 25, 1789, the First Congress of the United States proposed to the state legislatures 12 amendments to the Constitution that met arguments most frequently advanced against it. The first two proposed amendments, which concerned the number of constituents for each Representative and the compensation of Congressmen, were not ratified. Articles 3 to 12, however, ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures, constitute the first 10 amendments of the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights1. The first ten amendments to the United Sates constitution are normally referred as Bill of rights. Even though these amendments were introduced by James Madison in 1789 to the First United States Congress, it came into exist with effect only 1791 onwards only. Earlier majority of the states hesitated to accept these amendments which caused the delay. But three fourths of the states accepted it in 1791 and bill of rights became the part of US constitution from then onwards. Even though James Madison was the architect of these amendments, the contributions from other prominent personalities like Thomas Jefferson helped Madison immensely in attaching these amendments to the US constitution These ten amendments or Bill of rights protects basic rights of American citizens in many ways. It ensures free speech, free press, free assembly and association etc. It prohibits federal government from infringing into the human right issues such as liberty, equality and freedom of expression. It also prevented the Congress from making any controversial law which may affect the religious freedom enjoyed by the American people. It also ensures speedy and impartial trial and court procedures in public offense cases. In a true democratic state, the public should hold the power instead of the government and Bill of rights was an attempt to give more power to the public which earlier enjoyed by the governments. This paper briefly analyses only the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments Fourth amendment of criminal rights The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized2. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the public against illegal or unreasonable searches and seizures. Earlier, law enforcement agencies misused their power in many ways to take revenge upon their enemies or opponents. Even the political leaders misused their power to silence their opponents from making any comments against the administration. Law enforcement agencies searched the houses of the political opponents and seized many of their properties even without any warrant before the introduction of the fourth amendment. Fourth amendment enabled the public to ask for search warrants before the law enforcement agencies encroached in to their houses or properties. These warrants should be given by a court and hence it is impossible for the police or other law enforcement agencies to disturb the public without any reasons. It is impossible to perform searches and arrests without the endorsement of the court at present in America. In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that certain searches and seizures violated the Fourth Amendment even when a warrant was issued properly. Dolree Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene materials after an admittedly illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. She appealed her conviction on the basis of freedom of expression.The Court brushed aside the First Amendment issue and declared that "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is, by [the Fourth Amendment], inadmissible in a state court." Mapp had been convicted on the basis of illegally obtained evidence. This was an historic -- and controversial -- decision. It placed the requirement of excluding illegally obtained evidence from court at all levels of the government. The decision launched the Court on a troubled course of determining how and when to apply the exclusionary rule3. Fifth amendment of criminal rights No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation 4. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. It was derived from the English common law. Fifth amendment demands that a person taken into the police custody should be educated about his fifth amendment rights by the authorities before being questioned. In other words the police officer who arrested a person in connection with certain crime should tell four things to the accused person in custody before starting his interrogation. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you5. In short, a person in police custody can remain silent if he wishes so and it is the duty of the police officer to make evidences against him if the officer is so sure about the involvement of the accused in the crime. If the police officer failed to remind the person in custody about his Fifth Amendment rights, all the confessions and answers made by the person will remain involuntary, and cannot be used against the suspect in any criminal case. For example, consider a person committed a robbery, being arrested by a police officer. If the person confessed the crime out of fear before the officer revealing his Fifth Amendment rights, the suspect’s revelations will remain meaningless to the court or the court may not consider such revelations. In United States v. Moreland, 258 U.S. 433 (1922), the Supreme Court held that the accused Moreland was denied justice on grounds of the Fifth Amendment. United States v. Moreland, case involved a Fifth Amendment rights issue centering on whether or not hard labor was an infamous or whether imprisonment in a penitentiary was a necessity for punishment to be considered infamous. Moreland undergone a jury trial and was found guilty of his failure to provide proper child support and a fine of $ 500 imposed upon him. Moreland was sentenced to the workhouse at hard labor for 6 months since he failed to pay the fine. Moreland questioned the above punishment on the basis of his rights with respect to Fifth Amendment which put ban on individuals being held to answer for infamous crimes without indictment or presentment by a grand jury. The court upheld his argument on the basis of laws with respect to fifth amendment and made him free of any charges 6. Sixth amendment of criminal rights In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense7. The Sixth Amendment is related to criminal prosecutions. It guarantees a speedy trial by an impartial jury. In normal circumstances, the delay of more than a year from the date of arrest of a suspected person remains unconstitutional according to the sixth amendments. A person will become a criminal only when the charges against him are proved in the court. Until then he is merely a suspect who could either be a criminal or an innocent. According to criminal justice procedures and principles, no innocent people should be punished even if thousands of culprits escaped from punishments. Under such circumstances, keeping a suspected person in police custody or judicial custody for a prolonged period without conducting a fair trial can be considered as the denial of justice to the suspected person. In some cases, the prosecution may delay the trail more in order to collect more evidences needed to establish the crime against the accused. Prosecution can delay the trail only at unavoidable circumstances which should be informed to the court. For example, in order to secure the presence of an absent witness, prosecution can delay the trial up to certain extent. In some cases, if the suspected person agrees to delay the trail, then also the prosecution delays it. For example, in some cases the delay of trial may work in favor of the accused and he can allow the prosecution to delay the trial. But in such cases, the accused cannot argue later that his trial has been unduly delayed In Strunk v. United States, 412 U.S. 434 (1973United Sates Supreme Court ruled that if the reviewing court finds that a suspect's right to a speedy trial was violated, then the case must be dismissed. The District court denied the petitioner’s motion to dismiss the federal charge on the ground that he had been denied a speedy trial. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that he had been denied a speedy trial, but that the "extreme" remedy of dismissal of the charges was not warranted. The case was remanded to the District Court to reduce the sentence by 259 days, to compensate for the unnecessary delay that had occurred between the return of the indictment and petitioner's arraignment. The Supreme Court has held that, since the delayed trial violates the defendant's rights and no further remedy would be appropriate. Thus, a reversal or dismissal of a criminal case on speedy trial grounds means that no further prosecution for the alleged offense can take place8. Conclusions Then fourth, fifth and sixth amendments which are the part of Bill of rights in United Sates’ constitution ensures justice to the people. These amendments upheld the dignity of the public in many ways. The fourth amendment protects the public against illegal or unreasonable searches and seizures whereas the Fifth Amendment protects the public against the abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. The Sixth Amendment ensures speedy and impartial trial to the accused people. The core of all these amendments is to ensure that justice should not be denied to any people and it should be ensured in a speedy manner. Keeping a person under suspicion for a prolonged period is unconstitutional and more over encroaching into the properties of the public without proper warrant is unjustified. No innocent person should be punished even if thousands of criminals escaped which is the slogan put forward by these amendments. Bibliography 1. Bill of rights, accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights.html 2. Cornel University law school, U.S. Constitution, accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution 3. FindLaw, 2010, “Miranda" Rights and the Fifth Amendment, accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/criminal_rights/your-rights-miranda/miranda.html 4. Mapp v. Ohio, accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1960/1960_2 5. PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/054476.P.pdf, p.2-5 6. U.S. Supreme Court STRUNK v. UNITED STATES, 412 U.S. 434 (1973), accessed on 30 August 2010 from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=412&invol=434 Read More