The issue addressed by the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Wade (1967), and a companion case Gilbert v. California (1967), was whether or not the defendants’ rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated when Wade was presented in a lineup without his counsel present. Wade had already been indicted for robbery when he was presented to witnesses in the same fashion as the robber appeared at the bank, with strips f tape on his face. In the case of Wade, the court held that his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination was not violated by his mere presence or repeating words uttered by the suspect of the crime he was accused. However, since the lineup was conducted post indictment, and he had no counsel present during the lineup, that was considered a violation of his right to counsel and jeopardized his possible ability to receive a fair trial.
The Court reviewed Wade and decided in four areas. The first position they took was
…show more content…
v. Wade, 1967 pp. 239). The Court dismissed that having the accused in a lineup, speak and wear clothing does not violate self-incrimination since he did not provide any testimonial evidence, which the Amendment protects against. The Court further ruled that a lineup is a critical stage since there is the risk that the absence of counsel might impair the accused ability to receive a fair trial (U.S. v. Wade, 1967). Having counsel present also allows for the possibility for cross examination of the witness at trial, and also keeps the accused of standing alone against the State and ensuring the possibility of an unfair line up does not take place, e.g. all members of the lineup are blonde and the accused is brunette, or in the case of Stovall where the suspect was handcuffed to two police officers and brought before the witness – suggestiveness and influence issues (Stovall v. Denno
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
The Sixth Amendment states that the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. However, Dexter was in jail for 25 years since 1982, and the appeal was still in process to the Supreme Court. Also, based on the jury selection on exhibit B, document one, there were only white people in the final jury, and African Americans were struck peremptory by prosecution. Dexter did not have an impartial jury because white people may favor his opposed side due to the different race. According to Batson v. Kentucky, the USSC also determined that peremptory challenges used to exclude jurors on the basis of race could be challenged by the defendant. It was not fair for Dexter to not have the same race people as him in the jury. In addition, the Sixth Amendment also says that both federal and state courts must provide a lawyer if the accused cannot afford to hire one. Even though Dexter did have an attorney, his attorney was not organized and prepared. The adequate attorney was not as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment because he admitted that “he has not been to the crime scene, or viewed the crime scene photographs…has not viewed the prosecution’s witness list.” He had not done anything that could help defend Dexter. He didn't even call witnesses in the court to help Dexter. Strickland v. Washington also supports this because the court upheld the defendant’s conviction that his rights had been violated when his lawyer did not provide enough evidence to avoid the death
Roe V. Wade is known as the case that went to Supreme Court and eventually got abortion legalized. An abortion is defined as the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end or terminate a pregnancy. Thousands of years ago abortion was accepted. In ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt herbs were used to induce the labor prematurely. (The American Bar Association 210) Similar methods are still used today. There are many countries where abortion is illegal. In these places the option is herbal abortions. These are less effective but sometimes it is the only option for women who need to end their pregnancies. Although the method is natural it is probably the most ineffective. Women who undergo this natural method also can
The laws surrounding Abortion, particularly the efforts to ban abortion and overturn Roe Vs. Wade are one of the most significant social problems we are facing in 2017. Roe v. wade is a landmark decision that was made by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion back in 1973. Abortion has been a prevalent social problem throughout history and continues to be very much a part of the social and political debate today. In fact, abortion has been one of the biggest controversies of all time. Both sides of the argument, pro-choice and pro-life, have many valid points to back their opinion and that is partly why this continues to be such a big debate. The other part is that it is very much a political issue. I stand firmly on the
Rule of Law: “The right of self-representation finds support in the structure of the Sixth Amendment, an informed and intelligent defendant who decides to waive his right to counsel has the constitutional right to represent himself” (LSCB, 2013). After all, the defendant, and not his lawyer or the State, will bear the personal consequences of a conviction.
To this day, Americans have many rights and privileges. Rights stated in the United States constitution may be simple and to the point, but the rights Americans have may cause debate to whether or not something that happens in society, is completely reasonable. The Texas v. Johnson case created much debate due to a burning of the American Flag. One may say the burning of the flag was tolerable because of the rights citizens of the United States have, another may say it was not acceptable due to what the American flag symbolizes for America. (Brennan and Stevens 1). Johnson was outside of his First Amendment rights, and the burning of the American flag was unjust due to what the flag means to America.
Lawrence v. Texas In the case Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558, 2003) which was the United States Supreme Court case the criminal prohibition of the homosexual pederasty was invalidated in Texas. The same issue has been already addressed in 1989 in the case Bowers v. Hardwick, however, the constitutional protection of sexual privacy was not found at that time. Lawrence overruled Bowers and held that sexual conduct was the right protected by the due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The effects of the ruling were quite widespread and led to invalidation of the similar laws throughout the United States that tried to criminalize the homosexual activity of adults who were acting in privacy.
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.
because the right to abort, whatever one thinks of it, is not found in the
In 1973 the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Roe V. Wade. Jane Roe was a single mother trying to raise one child on a limited income. She was living in Dallas Texas when she became pregnant with another child. There were no medical issues that would have prevented her from carrying this child to full term. The lack of income and already having a child was her deciding factor.
Overall, the ruling in this case was a perfect interpretation of the Constitution. Despite opposition claiming that it is not addressed in the Constitution, too few rights are ever addressed in the Constitution of the United States. That is why there is a thing called Judicial Review. By utilizing judicial review, the interpreters of the law –Supreme Court, may make changes to policies and laws. Abortion, medicinal marijuana, and marriage fall under the umbrella of Equal Protection since they correspond to the rights and liberties of US citizens.
Richey, W. (2003). Can a Defendant Be Denied the Right To Confront Witnesses? Christian Science Monitor , 2.
The case that I decided to write about is one of the most controversial cases that have ever happened in the United States. The Roe v. Wade (1973) case decided that a woman with her doctor could choose to have an abortion during the early months of that pregnancy. However, if the woman chose to wait until the later months of the pregnancy then they would have certain restrictions based on their right to privacy. This case invalidated all state laws which limited women’s access to abortions during their first trimester of their pregnancy which was based on the Ninth Amendment of the Constitution. The Amendment states that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” (Cornell University Law School, 2013).
The Roe v. Wade case originated in the state of Texas in 1970 at the suggestion of Sarah Weddington an Austin attorney. Norma McCorvey otherwise known as "Jane Roe" was an unmarried pregnant woman seeking to overturn the anti-abortion law in the state of Texas. The lawsuit claimed that the statue was unconstitutionally vague and abridged privacy rights of pregnant women guaranteed by the first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendments to the constitution. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade)
Even to this day, women have not reached maximum equality, but the landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade has helped the women’s equality movement drastically take a step in the right direction. Prior to the case, women had their rights very limited and restricted. Everyone was and still is entitled to their basic rights, however pregnant women were not. Their first, fourth, fifth, ninth, and fourteenth amendment rights were violated and were not addressed until Jane Roe testified in court. The decision made by the court still has a lasting impact even to this day. The landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade was not just a win for Jane Roe, but a win for all women as it helped break the barrier that surrounded women’s equality.