Case Study Of Captain Wilson's Fifth Amendment Law

1018 Words3 Pages

. Motion: Detective Willis’ questioning after Captain Wilson’s request for an attorney did not violate Captain Wilson’s Fifth Amendment rights. Along with Captain Wilson’s statement to the undercover police detective is admissible as evidence under the Fifth Amendment. 2. Facts: On July 2016, a group of six people, including Captain Eric Wilson, was in Fort Collins heavily drinking at a friend’s bachelor party. Captain Wilson broke into an SUV that he believed to be one of his friend’s, Mike. After waiting for Mike for some time, Captain Wilson decided to hot-wire the car and drive home. While driving home, Captain Wilson was intoxicated to the point of swerving and killing an innocent bicyclist. After getting out of the vehicle …show more content…

Argument: Detective Willis’ questioning of the after Captain Wilson’s request for an attorney was not in violation Captain Wilson’s Fifth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment is applicable to this case because there was government action involved. In addition, Captain Wilson was by definition in custody because he was arrested and taken to the police station where the suspect lost his freedom of action. Officer Heinrichs informed Captain Wilson of his Miranda rights and began questioning. While Captain Wilson was indecisive to either remain silent or follow his commanders advice, he did not invocate his right to remain silent clear and unambiguous to the police officers. That is why the questioning continued for another thirty minutes. Once Captain Wilson clearly implied “I am going to call a lawyer right now” is when the police officers ceased questioning immediately. As for Captain Wilsons statements to the undercover police detective “Jim”, are admissible under the Fifth Amendment. “Jim’s” question to Captain Wilson of why he was in jail is not in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Captain Wilson still had knowledge of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent because Officer Heinrich recently gave Wilson’s Miranda rights during their questioning. In addition, Miranda rights are only applicable during a custodial interrogation. Where in this matter, there was no custodial interrogation. “Jim” was not interrogating Captain Wilson. “Jim” was asking a

Show More
Related

  • Ernesto Miranda's Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court ruled that due to the coercive nature of the custodial interrogation by police, no confession could be admissible under the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination Clause and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney unless a suspect has been made aware to his rights and the suspect had then waived them

    Read More

  • Arizona V. Hicks

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    In fact the officer did violate the Amendments; this was determined by the officer only having reasonable suspicion, not probable cause to seize the items under the “plain view” doctrine. His actions were not backed up by the U.S. Constitution.

    Read More

  • Dwight Dexter Case Study

    693 Words  | 2 Pages

    The rights of Dwight Dexter in the Fifth Amendment were violated. The amendment prevents the government from prosecuting people unfairly. Accused cannot be jailed or have their property taken without due process

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Miranda V. Arizona

    574 Words  | 2 Pages

    Miranda Rights became a United States Supreme Court decision in 1966 (Miranda v. Arizona), in which the high court made a decision in favor of and upheld that the Fifth Amendment rights of Miranda were violated. The Miranda ruling gives suspects the right to remain silent and not speak to any law enforcement as a means to prevent self incrimination, the right to have an attorney present during questioning, if an attorney is requested and the defendant can’t afford one, there are provisions in Miranda for an attorney to be appointed to defend the individual.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Fifth Amendment

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is derived from the rights Americans have to not be forced to testify against themselves in a criminal case. But, the Fifth Amendment also protects against double jeopardy and gives people charged with a felony the right to a grand jury indictment (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Double jeopardy basically states that if a conviction or acquittal was reached in a criminal case, the person can no longer be tried again for the same offense (Bohm & Haley, 2011). The procedural rights for self-incrimination are also applied to any custodial situations the police conduct. To ensure that statements, or confessions a suspect makes are allowed in court there is a two-prong tests that should be followed. First, is the person considered to be in a custodial situation and two, are the police intending to ask incriminating questions. If yes is the answers to both then the suspect must be read his or her rights. This is known as giving someone his or her Miranda rights derived from the famous case

    Read More

  • The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment

    2077 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth-Amendment to many American citizens and law makers is considered abstract. The complexity of this concept can easily be traced back to its beginning in which it lacked an easily identifiable principle. Since its commencement in 1789 the United States Judicial system has had a hard time interpreting and translating this vague amendment. In many cases the courts have gone out of their way to protect the freedoms of the accused. The use of three major Supreme Court disputes will show the lengths these Justices have gone through, in order to preserve the rights and civil liberties of three criminals, who were accused of heinous crimes and in some cases were supposed to face up to a lifetime in federal prison.

    Read More

  • 4th Amendment Violations

    1605 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Lamborghini is not admissible due to the fact it was not covered by the warrant and the VID# was not in plain sight of the Agent doing the search. The statement made about trying to find Snow White would not be admissible in court because Agent Smith arrested Doe and started asking him questions about Doe's crime before Doe read his Miranda Rights. Lastly, the statement Doe made about his supplier would be admissible in court because Doe read his Miranda Rights and acknowledged his understanding of the rights and made a voluntary confession afterwards with no coercion on the part of the Agents involved.

    Read More

  • The 5th Amendment

    697 Words  | 2 Pages

    are expected to tell the truth, even if that truth was to put you in

    Read More

  • Fifth Amendment Essay

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ained in their questioning. Officers commonly have small cards with the Miranda warnings on them so they don’t forget or skip over a part of ones right, if this does occur evidence still cannot be properly obtained because the person was not fully warned of all their rights. Currently, the only unwarned questioning that can occur is if the officer believes the public is in some type of danger. For example, if police come across a man standing in a convenience store that fits the description of recent thefts in a nearby neighborhood and the man runs once police confront him and is later caught and searched, when upon the search they realize he has an empty shoulder holster. In this scenario the public is in potential danger, the police can ask him where the gun is hidden without reading the man his rights and it would not be violating his Fifth Amendment rights.

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights

    1348 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miranda v Arizona went all the way to the Supreme Court. There the Supreme Court ruled that the police do have a responsibility to inform a subject of an interrogation of their constitutional rights. The constitutional rights have to do with self-incrimination, and the right to counsel before, during and after questioning.

    Read More

  • Midterm Hypothetical: The 4th Amendment And 6th Amendment

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...you think I need an attorney?” He also asked this question several times thorough the interrogation. In this situation the police officer should have allowed Mr. Wilson to get a attorney after saying “I think I need an attorney?” because this is going against his basic rights and violates the 6th Amendment.

    Read More

  • Essay On Miranda V Arizona

    1071 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona is a case that revolutionized the rights of an accused while in custody and interrogation. The Supreme court leaders based the rights of Mr. Miranda by the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution. The fifth amendment has been interpreted though the decision of supreme court rulings into the right to remain silent in an interrogation in order to prevent the accused to testify against himself. This amendment also protects any person from double jeopardy from the same crime, gives him or her a grand jury, and it requires for due process of law to come in effect in case a citizen is denied him or her from their right of life, liberty, or property.

    Read More

  • Restraint and Activism

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.

    Read More

  • Miranda v. Arizona

    721 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1966, American police procedure was changed by what is known today as the Miranda Rights. In 1963, Ernesto Miranda, a twenty three year old Hispanic American with an eighth grade education was arrested for kidnap and rape. (Paddock) He was identified by the victim of the crime in a police lineup. After he was identified, he was taken into police interrogation for two hours. When he was arrested, he was not informed of his Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate himself. He was also not informed of his Sixth Amendment right to have the assistance of an attorney. In the first part of his interrogation, Miranda denied having any involvement in the crime, but after two hours he confessed to the crime in writing. (Street Law)

    Read More

  • Michael Brown Shooting Essay

    1374 Words  | 3 Pages

    The report included testimony from Officer Darren Wilson, physical evidence, forensic evidence, and many witnesses. According to the Department of Justice report on the incident, Officer Darren Wilson was driving after finishing one of his calls and saw Michael Brown and his friend walking on the double yellow line in the middle of the street blocking traffic. According to his account, officer Wilson told them to move to the sidewalk in which they ignored. He then noticed they fit the descriptions he had earlier heard of the suspects of the robbery, he then parked his vehicle blocking traffic. He attempted to get out of his vehicle to speak to the boys but apparently Michael Brown blocked the car door and started to punch the officer. They engaged in a scuffle where Officer Wilson reached for his gun in which he claims that all he had access to. Michael Brown tried to take control of the gun, according to Wilson’s account. (Department of Justice, 2015) Officer Wilson then regained control of the gun and shot Michael Brown’s hand. Michael Brown then took off and Wilson chased him on foot. Brown started coming towards Wilson. Many witnesses even described Brown as “charging” towards Wilson. (McLaughlin, E. C. (2014, August 15) Wilson warned Brown multiple times and Brown kept moving forward towards Wilson

    Read More

More about Case Study Of Captain Wilson's Fifth Amendment Law

Open Document