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
678 Words | 3 Pages

Issue: Was the juvenile court’s waiver of jurisdiction valid? Was the statutory requirement of a “full investigation” been met? Rule: The Supreme Court decided there was not an adequate examination preceding the adolescent court waiver of

Read More
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
783 Words | 4 Pages

Abstract Miranda v. Arizona took place in 1996. The case involves a Hispanic man named, Ernesto Miranda and the state of New York. Miranda is being charged with rape and kidnapping. He was held in interrogation for a lengthy amount of time until he eventually confessed. He was found guilty and the conviction was approved by the supreme court because he did not request a lawyer.

Read More
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
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
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
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
863 Words | 4 Pages

This has turned into a landmark case because it has altered the way the juvenile delinquent court system runs. A teenager of fifteen years old, Gerald Gault found himself accused of making an obscene telephone call. The victim was a neighbor Mrs. Cook, who reported the incident to police on June 8, 1964. A police officer then located Gault and arrested him on the charges (United States Courts). In an interview with Gualt he describes the way officials handles his case.

Read More
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
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
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
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
648 Words | 3 Pages

We do not agree with these unconstitutional procedures. Currently, juvenile courts must afford minors basic constitutional protections such as advance notice of charges, the right to counsel, and the right to remain silent. An example of a needed right for minors is shown in the McKeiver v. Pennsylvania case. As a result of this case, adolescents were being deprived of the right to trial by jury, contradicting the 6th Amendment. The Supreme Court, during the case, said, "But one cannot say that in our legal system the jury is a necessary component of accurate factfinding."

Read More
649 Words | 3 Pages

Legal rights include being free of unjust search or seizure and imprisonment if there is no evidence. With this law in action, the federal government is protecting many youths individual rights. In schools students can’t have their lockers searched unless there is evidence, and they cannot be interrogated when they are more vulnerable like when they are alone. In addition to that, youths also have the legal right to have a quick trial, while still remaining innocent until proven guilty. Having this law, youths who do have to go to court, not only have an impartial court, but one that is fair.

Read More
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