When taken into police custody and identified by the victim as the attacker, he quickly admitted to the crime. Once given his sentence of twenty-three years in prison, he appealed the sentence. He told the Supreme Court that he was not reminded of the right to remain silent, therefore his sentence was illegitimate. The Supreme Court replied back by saying the he knowingly dismissed his rights when he confessed to the police. Three years after the crime, in 1966, the Supreme Court upturned the Arizona Supreme and created the ground rules of police interrogation.
Being expression one of the most important rights of the people to maintain a connected society right to speech should be accepted to do so. The first amendment is one of the most fundamental rights that individuals have. It is fundamental to the existence of democracy and the respect of human dignity. This amendment describes the principal rights of the citizens of the United States. If the citizens were unable to criticize the government, it would be impossible to regulate order.
Symbolic speech is a type of speech used to express one’s ideas. The notion of symbolic speech is protected in the United States constitution which evidently says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press...” (U. S. Constitution.). The freedom of speech represents one of the most vital amendments in the United States Constitution and carries its involvement regularly. The several varieties of speech that is protected in the Constitution affects each individual and one’s privileges, but this first amendment right is often defined by the courts with individual’s failure to properly use it.
Johnson was arrested under Texas law, which made the burning of the United States or Texas flags crimes. Johnson was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined two thousand dollars for his crime in restitution. Texas reasoned that the police were preventing the breach of peace; consider the flag a symbol of national unity. At Johnson's court trial, he was convicted of aiding, abetting and encouraging the burning of the Texan flag. This, in turn, made Johnson guilty under Texas state law.
Gregory Lee Johnson was convicted for desecration of a venerated object; a violation of a Texas Statute in the County Criminal Court No. 8 of Dallas County by Judge John C. Hendrik. He sentence was one year in prison and a fine of $2000. The respondent appealed with the Dallas Court of Appeals, Fifth Supreme Judicial District, 706 S.W.2d 120 (1986), Judge Vance affirmed the conviction, and a rehearing was denied. The defendant subsequently petitioned for a discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 755 S.W.2d 92 (1988).
Arguably the most important right set forth by the Founding Fathers’ pen is the right to free speech. American citizens have a pass to express their beliefs and ideals when and how they choose. A person, corporation, or institution found infringing on free speech is often publicly denounced as unpatriotic and undemocratic. Violations of the Constitution can even result in imprisonment. It seems some establishments of higher learning have forgotten the consequences of flouting the rights of individuals.
The logic used by the Court in order to justify their conclusion is fraught with weak reasoning and dangerous interpretations of the Constitution. It violates the precedent set in Miranda and seems tainted with a desire to justify consent searches at any cost. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte is a decidedly pro-order case because it qualifies another excuse police can raise to search a citizen, but it is also dangerous because it shows that the Court is not the unbiased referee between liberty and democracy that it should be.
This whole case started when Terence Graham was convicted to home invasion and attempted robbery. He then was sentence to life in prison, but he appealed his sentence by the eight amendment. The eight amendment sates that a person has the right to be free from any cruel and unusually punishment. He said that his rights were violated because he was given a lifelong sentence for doing no homicidal crime and he was also under the age of 18 at the time. He then lost his appeal to the Florida First District Court of Appeal, but then he later made an appeal to the federal court of the United States in 2009.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case. The issue was whether flag burning compromises emblematic speech secured by the first amendment. There were three arguments drafted from the proposed question “Is flag burning protected as symbolic speech by the first amendment?” (US Courts). One of the arguments included, “ can the government prohibit the act of flag burning as an infringement on the free speech clause of the first amendment,” (US Courts). the affirmative side argued that the first amendment indeed does protect against symbolic speech but only certain situations pertain to this circumstance.
Instead, it sentenced Ewing to 25 years to life in prison which felt was “grossly disproportionate” under the Eighth Amendment which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. The State Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling as did the United States Supreme Court who ruled that the 25 year to life sentence was