Term
|
Definition
| Requires that polce advise a person in custody that he or she does not have an affirmative duty to speak with representatives of the government and tat he or she may remain silent. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| determined that the 5th amendment's privilege against self-incrimination was incorporated into the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment was enforceable against the states. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Where in certain circumstances the suspect has been taken into custody, been denied counsel or not yet been read miranda warnings, Court held that no statement elicited by the police during the interrogation should have been used against him at his criminal trial. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court extended the right to be apprised of constitutional rights to misdemeanant detainees for whom interrogation was desired. Miranda warnings must be given to all individuals prior to custodial interrogation, whether the offense investogated is a felony or a misdemeanor and regardless of the educational level or legal understanding of the arrestee. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that the self-incrimination clause of the 5th amendment does not require the suppression of a free and voluntary confession, made after proper Miranda warnings and a valid waiver of the rights, even where the police had obtained an earlier voluntary but unwarned admission from the defendant. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| If the defendatn were to offer testimony from the witness stand that directly conflicts with earlier non-Mirandized statements the prosecution may introduce the illegally obtained statements solely to attempt to impeach the defendant and not for proof of guilt. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| If the arrestee indicates in any manner and at any time that there is no further desire to be interrogate, the police inquiry must immediately cease. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Even where police attempt to question an arrestee about additional crimes unrelated to the reason for initial custody and the arrestee has previously invoked the right to counsel protections under Mirand, such questioning is unconstitutional. The confession for the second crime should have been excluded from admission at his trial for the second time. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court stated that as "a determination of whether a suspect is 'in custody' for purposes of recieving Miranda protection, the ultimate inquiry is simply whether there is a 'formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement." The key to Beheler may have been the fact that he was freely permitted to leave at the end of the questioning, indicatiing the lack of custody. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| For custody purposes, the court said "two discrete inquiries are essential to the determination: first, what were the circumstances surrounding the interrogation; and second, given those circumstances, would a reasonable person have felt he or she was not at libery to terminate the interrogation and leave." |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The court held that the term interrogation, for Miranda purposes, not only includes direct and unquivocal questions but also encompasses "any words or actions on the part of the police that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incrimination. Court indicated the definition of interrogation focuses on reasonable intentions of police. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court established a public safety exception to Mirand warnings in this case. Held that officer was free to inquire about the weapon prior to offering any Miranda warning and that the prosecution was premited to introduce both the weapon and the oral answers aginst the defendant. Where an immediate dnager to the safety of the public or a police officer appeared to exist, police can delay offering the Miranda warnings and may question suspect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that constitutional rights enforced by Miranda are personal to the accused an cannot be asserted by a family member, an attorny, or any other individual. Held two rules: must be voluntary, and must be made with full awarenes of suspect |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| On issues of alleged wairver of Miranda rights, the prosecution has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court determined that the case of Miranda v. Arizona was of constitutional dimension and could not be overturned by an act of Congress. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Provides protection for an accused from being required to actually testify against him-or herself as a witness or otherwise given evidence that is testimonial or communicative in nature. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court upheld the introduction of evidence of intoxication taken from a suspected alcohol impaired driver by a doctor at the request of an officer. Privelege is a baragainst compelling 'communications' or testimony', but that compulsion which makes a suspect or accused the source of 'real or physical evidence' does not violate it. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Justice HolmesDismissed argument that the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination would be violated by requireing a defendant to put on an article of clothing for identification purposes. The production of compelling a man in a criminal court to be witness against himself is a prohibitionthe use of physical or moral compulsion. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court rejected dionisio's denial to make a voice reocording, and rejected his fifth amendment argument with the conclusion that prior cases have uniformly rejected the contention that the compelled display of identifiable physical characteristics infringes on the privilege against compelled testimonail self-incrimination. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Said that the Fifth amendment forbids adverse comment by the prosecution on the accused's silence and instructions from the judge concerning the silence of the accused that indicate that silence may be evidence of guilt. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court determined that brutal beatings directed and conducted by a state cannot be used to coerce a confession from a defendant without violating the defendant's right to due process of law under the 14th amendment. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The use in a state criminal trial of a defendant's confession obtained by coercion, whether physical or mental, has been forbidden under decisions interpreting the 14th Amendment. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that the privilege against self-incrimination contained within the 5th amendment should provide protection against a state that was seeking to force an individua to give criminal evidence against himself. - under totality of circumstances twest- an admissible confession must be the result of the defendants free and voluntary, unfettered by coercion, whether physical or mental. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| So long as police do not illegally coerce physically or otherwise mentally motivate an individual to confess, the confession will not be excludable under grounds of a 5th amendment violation. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that a coerced confession should not have been introduced in court because the manner in which it was obtained violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment, and the court held that the harmless error standard had not been met. If appelatecourt determines that the use of the involuntary confession had no effect on the outcome of the case, the resultion conviction will not be disturbed. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court ruled that a refusal to take a blood alcohol test after a police officer has lawfully requested it, is not an act coerced by the officer, and thus s not protected by the 5th amendment privilege aginst self incrimination. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A criminal suspect may be compelled to provide a handwriting sample without violating the 5th amendments protection against self-incrimination. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A criminal suspect may be compelled to provide a recording of his/her voice without violating the 5th amendment's protection against self incrimination. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| When the defense request evidence from the prosecution of an exculpatory nature, the prosecution generally must reveal whatever evidence it possesses thar meets the request. When a prosecutor fails to deliver what has been called Brady material, the defense may file a pretrial motion to compel the prosecution to comply with the Brady request. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that when a suspect has been formally charged with a crime an in-person lineup constitutes a critical stage of the criminal justice process, during which the suspect has a constitutional right to the assistance of counsel. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that the admission of the in-court identifications without first determining that the were not tainted by the illegal lineup but were of independent origin was consititutional error. Held that a post-indictment pretrial lineup at which the accused is exhibited to identifying witnesses is a critical stage of the criminal prosecution. that police conduct of such a lineup without notice to, and in absence of, his counsel was in violation of his 6th amendment right to counsel. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An arrestee or defendant has no 6th amendment right to counsel at a photographic array, no matter when it occurs, because the procedure is not one at which the accused requires" aid in coping with legal problems or assistance in meeting his adversary." |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court ruled that although the identification process might be somewhat suggestive, the procedure used here could meet due process standards where there was little likelihood of an erroneous misidentification, as tested by the five-factors test. It stands for the principle that identifications constitute a crucial part of the criminal justice process. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court noted that the acccused requires the guidence of counsel in every step of the criminal prosecution and that the 6th amendment right to counsel extends beyond the actual trial. The Court determined that a preliminay hearing constituted a critical stage of the criminal justice process, at which time the assistance of counsel was required by the federal constitution. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court determined that the factors used to set bail are subject to individual determination by taking due consideration for the personal circumstance of each person charged in federal prosecutions. Court should consider the nature and circumstances of the defendant and of th crime, the strength of the evidence, the gernal character of the accused, and the ability of a defendant to pay for release. sets out excessive bail as well. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court rejected arguments that the practoce of holding some defendants in custody pending trial constituted pretrial punishment and noted that the pretrial detention orders served to prevent dangers to the community, a legitimate regulatory goal. 8th amendment did not address the issue of whether bail should be available in a particular case and under what circumstances bail shoul be denied. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Right to speedy trial became a constitutional requirement enforceable against the states throught the due process clause of the 14th amendment. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that the length of time was only one factor to consider in evaluating whether the sixth amendment right to speedy trial has been violated. Court noted that the reasons for delay, defendants assertion or non-assertion of the right, and prejudice to the defendants case were three factors that must be considered. four factors test provides benchmark against which alleged violations of right to speedy trial can be measured. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court held that the double jeopardy clause protects against a second prosectuion for the same offense after the acquittal. It protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction. And it proteects against multiple punishments for the same offense. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the sale of each quantity of drug was seperated into a distinct transaction, which created a seperate, though virtually identical, new offense that occured at a different time from the first offense. Therefore, no violation of double jeopardy prohibition could be successfully argued. Offenses are seperate offenses for double jeopardy purposes if each crime requires proof of an element that the other does not. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court concluded that where the two offense for which the defendant is punished or tried cannot surviv the "same-elements" test, the double jeopardy bar applies. The same-elements test, sometimes reffered to as the "Blockburger test" inquires whether each offense contains an element not contained in the other; if not, they are the "same offense" and double jeopardy bars additional punishment and successive prosecution. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| In 5th amdmt. prohibition against double jeopardy, court determined that the provision applied against the states so that a judgement of acquittal to a crime operated to prevent a second trial for that crime. Benton overruled Palkov. Connecticut and had the effect of inorporating the 5th amendment prohibition against double jeopardy into the due process clause of the 14th amdmt so that an acquittal in a criminal case copuld not be retried by the prosecution. |
|
|
