ipl-logo

Juvenile Miranda Rights Essay

644 Words3 Pages

Juvenile Miranda Rights For a long time juveniles were sentenced and tried like adults. In this essay I’m going to look at juvenile’s Miranda rights, what makes up a valid waiver of their rights, and what officers must do to make sure a juvenile’s confession will not be concealed in court. There wasn’t a way for juveniles to plead their own case. It wasn’t until the Industrialization Era that society developed the parens patriae concept. It tells you that the state could intervene to protect a child’s welfare (Caccarozzo). The juvenile court system that was developed was very different from the adult court. There’s more of an importance on helping the juvenile then in adult court. The reason why the court decided to give juveniles Miranda rights was because of the Gault decision. This is the most single important event in the history of juvenile justice because this guaranteed due process rights for juveniles. Those due process rights stated in the 14th amendment applied to juveniles as …show more content…

For example, in the case U.S. v. Burrous, the juvenile was arrested for armed robbery. One of the arresting officers asked the juvenile a couple times how his parents could be contacted. The juvenile didn’t know how to contact them. Also, the juvenile wasn’t cooperating and didn’t want to try and contact his parents himself. Since the officers didn’t have enough information to locate his parents, that means the juvenile voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and confessed. The court ruled that the officers made good efforts to locate the juvenile’s parents and that his confession was valid. To add to this, the juvenile’s parents must be contacted immediately because in U.S. v. John Doe, the officers contacted the parents but they waited 3 hours after the juvenile was taken into custody to contact them. It must be immediate for it to be

Show More
Related

Summary Of Fare V. Michael C.

734 Words | 3 Pages

Fare v. Michael C. is a case from 1979 where the United States Supreme Court reviewed what would make a juvenile’s confession inadmissible in court (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). The case begins with the respondent, Michael C., a 16-year-old juvenile being taken into custody by Van Nuys police in California on the suspicion of murder. He was immediately taken to the police station for questioning. Prior to the beginning of questioning, police fully advised Michael of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona. At the beginning of the questioning, Michael, who was on probation in the Juvenile Court, asked for his probation officer to be present.

Read More

Assignment 2: Briefing Of Miranda V. Arizona

783 Words | 4 Pages

The arguments in the case began when the defense, who was representing Miranda, made an objection to allowing into evidence the written confession due to Miranda not being properly informed of his constitutional rights. This particular argument originates from the fact that officers had admitted that they did not read Miranda his right to an attorney; they also read his right to a voluntary confession out loud before receiving an oral confession. The State of Arizona then presented their argument that because he did not specifically ask for an attorney, none of his rights were violated. The purpose of their argument was to make certain that the written confession was applied as evidence to charge him with the

Read More

Summary Of Miranda Vs Arizona Case Brief

531 Words | 3 Pages

Case Brief Case: Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Facts: The Miranda warning, which informs criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to an attorney while they are in police custody or being questioned in a detention facility, was created by the landmark Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966). It was brought by Ernesto Miranda, who was detained under the charges of rape, kidnapping and robbery. He wasn't told of his right to an attorney or the right to remain silent before being questioned by the police, so Miranda admitted to the crimes while being interviewed. The confession was admitted into evidence during the trial, and Miranda was found guilty. Procedural History: After Miranda was convicted, he appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court who reaffirmed his rights had not been violated.

Read More

Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Summary

437 Words | 2 Pages

Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark case where Ernesto Miranda was arrested for rape and kidnapping and was refused an attorney even after he requested one during custodial interrogation, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Miranda's confession could not be used because Miranda was unaware of his Fifth Amendment right to refrain from making self incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to have legal counsel, nor were his rights made known to him by investigators, even after Miranda requested legal counsel (Bethel, 2015).   According to Criminal Law and Procedure, Miranda protects the suspect more than anyone else in the equation as it allows the suspect to be aware of their right to remain silent and that legal counsel is available to them if they

Read More

Miranda V. Arizona Case Brief

870 Words | 4 Pages

This allows the suspected criminal to be aware of his rights, which could allow him to avoid things such as a false confessions due to intimidation. The miranda rights have had such a big impact that they’ve now become something so basic and elementary that we now take it for granted and consider it the norm. D. Arguments Miranda’s party argued that his confession wasn’t admissible in court due to the fact that his constitutional rights had been violated. They stated that, he was deprived of having an attorney with him and that he was never aware that he had the right to remain silent, thus it was easier to coerce him into confession.

Read More

Miranda V. Arizona Case Study

861 Words | 4 Pages

(The Dynamic Court). This is the opposing side of Miranda V. Arizona of the officers admitting that they had not told Miranda about his rights and that helped the judges and court to make a decision. “The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The police duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a witness against himself," and Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney.”. (Alex Mcbride)

Read More

Miranda Warning Dbq

883 Words | 4 Pages

The creation of the United States and the colonies that came before, brought about many legal traditions and precedents. Among these legal traditions and precedents, is an essential precedent present in all interrogation related proceedings and court ones—the Miranda warning. When an individual is detained, they may be subjected to an interrogation by designated officials. During an interrogation certain rights are guaranteed to an individual through the provision of the Bill of Rights to prevent self-incrimination and the historical precedent established before it. However, in certain situations, these rights were not always guaranteed as they should’ve been.

Read More

In Re Gault Case Study

863 Words | 4 Pages

It is shocking to know that before 1967 youths in the United States did not have the same rights as adults in court. Before the landmark case In Re Gault individuals underage were not promised the freedoms under the fourteenth amendment. The court system did not take juvenile delinquent cases as seriously. It was almost as if they brushed the delinquents under the rug and put them into a detention center the first chance they got. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in the case of In Re Gault the requirements for due process were not met.

Read More

Earl Warren Accomplishments

1055 Words | 5 Pages

Arizona that criminals must be informed of their rights before being prosecuted. Today, this ruling requires that police inform criminals of their right to remain silent, and that anything they say can be used against them in court. These rights, also known as Miranda rights include the criminal’s right to an attorney. If the police do not read a person’s Miranda rights when arresting a criminal, the court judging the case can discard any evidence that the criminal reveals while in police custody since he or she was not informed of their right to remain silent. While the Miranda decision was unpopular at the time, it was critical to ensuring that criminals were being persecuted for the appropriate crime on clear evidence and received the right to a fast and proper

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona Case

1680 Words | 7 Pages

The case of People v. Tanner, decided on June 23, 2014, is an example of a case in which the accused felt their Miranda rights were violated. On October 17, 2011, George Tanner was arrested for murder, read his Miranda Rights, and taken to jail. He then asked for counsel and to stop questioning until he had a lawyer. While talking to a psychologist shortly after, he said he wanted “to get something off his chest”. The psychologist informed the administrator of the jail and they called in a lawyer so they could speak to him.

Read More

In Re Gault Case Study

709 Words | 3 Pages

It established the constitutional right to legal counsel for children facing delinquency proceedings.” (Adler, 2007) Before Re Gault juveniles didn’t get the same protection that adults got. Juveniles were not required to have any representation, wether it be a lawyer or a parent. Children were often mistreated and sentenced unfairly. “Children in the juvenile court were not entitled to legal

Read More

Three Major Court Cases

677 Words | 3 Pages

The case made an impact on the treatment of juveniles today because juveniles now have four basic constitutional rights when they are to be

Read More

Probation Pros And Cons Essay

704 Words | 3 Pages

In the end “The United States Supreme Court, Fare v. Michael C., 442 U.S. 707 (1979). , ruled that On the basis of the record in this case, we hold that the Juvenile Court's findings that respondent voluntarily and knowingly waived his rights and consented to continued interrogation, and that the statements obtained from him were voluntary, were proper, and that the admission of those statements in the proceeding against respondent in Juvenile Court was correct” (FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions (n.d.). This case was important for the Juvenile Courts System and juvenile suspects because it required, that the courts look a variety of factors to determine whether information that was obtained from a juvenile by the police could be used in court. It was also imported because it set a precedence that parents, guardians, custodians or other significant adults, or attorneys do not have to be present when a juvenile is questioned or interrogated by law enforcement (Elrod & Ryder

Read More

Miranda Rights Essay

568 Words | 3 Pages

The Miranda Rights were put in place to make sure any person who is placed under arrest, is informed of their rights. A suspect should only be read their rights when legally required, such as when an official arrest is made, or when the person being questioned is a juvenile. Exigent circumstances can grant an officer the ability to bypass reading of The Miranda Rights to a suspect. Page Break In 1966 the Miranda Rights were established to insure a person who is under arrest is aware of their rights, which is due to the United States Supreme Court case Miranda V. Arizona.

Read More

Juvenile Rehabilitation: Juvy Vs. Jail

1230 Words | 5 Pages

The right to a miranda warning also takes place in both the juvenile and adult systems. The miranda warning also known as the miranda rights is the right to silence said by a police officer to the person being taken into

Read More

More about Juvenile Miranda Rights Essay

Related Topics

Open Document