Resulting it to be a landmark case since once a case reaches the supreme court it not only affects the participant but other people in the future as well. When the state court restrained gideon from a counsel to defend himself his rights were violated and the courts would not want the same mistake repeated once more. The Supreme court protected the individual right to a counsel in the case Gideon v. Wainwright by using the 6th amendment and 14th amendment. Some people think that the U.S supreme court should’ve sided Wainright because the case was presented within a state-wide court which has different rules than a federal court but the supreme court sided with Gideon because it violated his rights as an individual and no type of authority should've take his rights
It has saved lives from the mistakes made before this amendment. The judge has the opportunity to assign legal punishments and penalties, but the purpose of this amendment was too protect them from the preposterous punishments like the excessive use of the death penalty for cases not necessary. The history of the amendment actually dates back to the roots of the amendment which was used in the Bill of Rights in 1689. The new amendment made in 1791 was a replica in a way of what was in the Bill of Rights. The practical use for this amendment was obviously needed because the punishments used back in those early times was much more aggressive and cruel.
Ans-2) Yes, default rules are very important for the incomplete contracts to save the other party from loss in case of default of another party. FACTS As the judicial discretion creates more laws so government should also help the legislature so that they can make
After looking at both sides of the argument, we return to the debate of whether or not a polygraph is effective and accurate for lie detection. Although police and governments are highly reliant on polygraphs in criminal procedure and the new technology for polygraph testing is quite impressive and convincing, the accuracy of a polygraph we use today is still doubtable as well as there is scientific evidence to prove the results of a polygraph. If people keep taking risks to use current polygraphs, people with professional training and antisocial personalities or even being either nervous or embarrassed may cause the results to be off track and escape the
Supreme Court case that birthed the Miranda rights (Sonneborn, 2003), the criminal suspects that are denied their Miranda rights are essentially denied their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment protects criminals from abuse of government authority, while the Sixth Amendment enables the person to have a fair trial, be informed of what he is being accused of, have witnesses come up for and against him, all in front of an impartial judge. If these rights are inherent to the United States of America, especially in regard to criminal proceedings, then they should be as such to any criminal offender, including one being accused of terrorist activity. In a country that prides itself on its fair criminal proceedings and trials, age-old Amendments should not be violated over the type of suspected criminal that someone
They say this because if the juvenile courts are accommodating than the minors may not understand the severity of their actions opposed to if they were to be put through a one-size-fits-all method that they may respond better. However, if minors are tried in juvenile court it may be more effective. They should do this because there they can be given methods of rehabilitation that may help them. In conclusion, juveniles should not be treated the same as adults when it comes to committing crimes so that they have a better chance to rehabilitate. Minors should not be treated the same as adults when it comes to committing crimes.
There are a lot more cases that deal with due process such as for an example Hurtado v. California that showed how the indictment of by a grand jury is necessary in deciding the fates of cases that are brought to the court of law. Without the efforts of these cases enforcing the constitution many citizens could suffer the fate of serving unnecessary time for a crime that was committed but failed to give them favorable odds of a fair trial. In the last few years civil rights cases such as Travyon Martin, have made African Americans feel like a target. Due process laws may have been followed but the ethics in the case allowed the general public to be in
Trial 3. Post-trial (A First Look at the Malaysian Legal System by Wan Arfah Hamzah published 8th December 2011) 1.1 Why Criminal Procedure Rules Matter The rules of criminal procedure are extremely important to defendants because they are designed to guarantee constitutional due process to those individuals charged with a crime. Criminal convictions can carry severe consequences, including: Paying steep fines and court costs, Loss of liberty by imprisonment and Loss of civil liberties, like the right to carry a weapon and the right to vote. A criminal conviction can also carry a permanent stigma. Criminal procedures are designed to make sure that any given defendant receives due process and their constitutional rights are protected.
Simpson was televised. It gave the public a realistic view into the court room. John Langbein from Yale Law School stated, “those cameras are an absolute godsend because the public has been educated to think that criminal trials are what they saw on Perry Mason and it ain’t true. What it’s showing people is the way the system really works” (4). However, many people are against cameras in the
The thought of Carl Lee Hailey, an African American male receiving a fair trial (due process) during a time of racial discrimination is very difficult but accomplishable. With the model of crime control being considered this case is full of possible opportunities that end up causing a lot of conflict as a result of racial discrimination and bias opinions. As previously mentioned, Packer was an individual who believed that there were two models that were seen as most crucial to the criminal justice system. The importance’s of the crime control model to Packer was the mechanism of moving quickly through the system and skipping steps within the court system to make sure that criminals stay off the street (10). Packer also explains the model of due process which is the practice of making sure that every case is sent through the system correctly and no steps are skipped no matter how long it may take (13).