ipl-logo

Why Was Salinas Silence A True Exercise Of The Fifth Amendment?

1407 Words6 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The orgin of the fifth amendment

Key Facts: On December 18, 1992, two brothers were shot and killed in their Houston home after throwing a party the previous night. Police obtained six shotgun shells from the site and received a description of a potential suspect from a local neighbor. The investigation led the police to Salinas, who willingly agreed to relinquish his shotgun for ballistics testing and to accompany police for further questioning. The interview lasted approximately one hour, where both parties were later in agreement that Salinas was not detained nor was he read Miranda warnings. Salinas answered most questions during the interview, but fell silent when asked if “his shotgun ‘would match the shells recovered at the scene of the murder.’” Upon receiving more …show more content…

Both courts affirmed the lower court’s judgment and rejected Salinas’ claim that his silence was used in chief violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Issue: Can one fairly conclude that an individual who agreed to be questioned has revoked the Fifth Amendment’s protection? Was Salinas’ silence a true exercise of this amendment?

Rule: The petitioner must specifically call on the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination at the time he relies on it in order to receive the benefit.

Decision: Salinas’ claim fails because he did not verbally invoke this Fifth Amendment privilege in his response to the officer’s questions. The lower court’s judgment is affirmed.

Reasoning: Certiorari was granted in the United States Supreme Court to resolve an appealed ruling from the lower courts to decide if a prosecutor may use a defendant’s silence as a claim against self-incrimination during a noncustodial police interview. As the petitioner did not verbally invoke the privilege of self-incrimination, it was found unnecessary to answer this specific claim, as the Fifth Amendment is a privilege against self-incrimination that should be expressly invoked by the defendant who desires the protection by claiming …show more content…

The first being that this case was accepted by the Supreme Court and second that this case took SIX years to reach a verdict. By reading the case it’s pretty evident that the defendant is guilty of the murder on the basis that he disappeared for 15 years after his interview before being found. What I don’t agree with is how long it took with all of the appeals to actually find him guilty. It seems unfair and unreasonable to have a case take this long especially if the person has a potential to be innocent. If Salinas was innocent, that’s six years he spent in jail that the court seems to have no regard for. As the Supreme Court only reviews 75 cases a year, how is it possible that this particular case took so long to review? The length of time is an unfortunate factor with this case, but it seems to be a common occurrence and a deciding factor when someone wants to sue. Everyone should have the right to get a decision quickly. It seems inhumane to do

Show More
Related
369 Words | 2 Pages

Facts A lady had an abortion performed through back alley means, and had medical complications that resulted in her being in the hospital and questioned by police. She gave them the name of the petitioner, Julius Wolf. The police then followed up on the lead and entered his office without a search warrant and seized items as evidence, one of which was a list of patients. The police then used that evidence to gather more testimony against Wolf.

Read More
1593 Words | 7 Pages

The accused, Wendell Clayton, was found in possession of a loaded illegal handgun which is banned under Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. A caller inside the coffee time store called 911 at about 1:22 reporting that there were around 10 black guys in the parking lot of The Million Dollar store, a strip club, across the street from him. The caller reported that certain individuals, 4 of the 10 black guys had guns on them and were openly displaying their handguns in the middle of the parking lot. Police immediately responded and within minutes the officers set up a roadblock in front of the exits to the location. As there were two entrances into the club’s parking lot, the officers positioned their vehicles so everything and anything harmful

Read More
123 Words | 1 Pages

In another way, the court case of Mallory v. Hogan is the right against self-incrimination in the fifth Amendment. William Mallory was found guilty and sentenced to jail with a fine. But, it was suspended and the court placed him on two years probation. However, within the time period of the probation, the Superior Court "appointed referee ordered Malloy to testify about gambling and other criminal activities in Hartford County." Mallory refused to incriminate himself and he was imprison for contempt the court and held until he willing to confess himself.

Read More
2176 Words | 9 Pages

On October 31, 1968, in Cleveland, Ohio a Cleveland police officer, named Martin McFadden, saw three men acting suspiciously around a jewelry store, which he believed they were casing a job. The officer, McFadden, walked up to three men and asked a few questions; afterwards, he proceeded to stop and frisk them. McFadden found a pistol in John Terry’s pocket, a revolver in Richard Chilton’s pocket and nothing was found on Carl Katz. The officer arrested Terry and Chilton for carrying concealed weapons and Carl Katz was sent free. Terry was convicted and sentenced to three years in jail.

Read More
476 Words | 2 Pages

The majority explained that the Fourth Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, allows for officers to arrests without a warrant where officers have probable cause to believe a suspect has committed a crime in the presence of the officer. In this case, the officers undoubtedly concluded that a felony had been committed, and the question for the Court was if the officers had sufficient probable cause to believe that Pringle had committed a crime. According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, that question was a fact dependent investigation as to whether circumstances allowed officers to conclude not only that a crime was committed but to have specific suspicion of Pringle. In the written opinion Justice Rehnquist stated that three men riding in a car where drugs are found, with all three suspects denying possession, affords officers probable cause to conclude that one or all have committed a crime. The Court rejected Pringle’s assertion that the probable cause in this case amounted to “guilt by association,” distinguishing this case from others in which searches of groups had been limited.

Read More
633 Words | 3 Pages

In 150 Conn. 220, 187 A. 2d 744, The Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors held that the protection against self-incrimination under the Fifth

Read More
567 Words | 3 Pages

Both owner and criminal where shot and seriously injured after the altercation and later presumed dead. The defendant and his two other accomplices, where later apprehended and charged for two counts of murder and one count of armed-robbery each.

Read More
297 Words | 2 Pages

Larry Hiibel was arrested and convicted in Nevada state court for failing to identify himself to a police officer who was investigating an assault. Some states including Nevada, has a law that requires a person to tell an officer his name if asked. Larry Hiibel challenged the conviction, claiming it violated his Fourth and Fifth Amendments, the right not to incriminate himself and to be free from unreasonable searches. The state intermediate court and Supreme Court rejected his argument in affirming the conviction. At first when I read this I think that this arrest and conviction violated Larry Hiibel Fourth and Fifth Amendment because he was arrested for the action of remaining silent but in a 5-to-4 opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy,

Read More
360 Words | 2 Pages

The 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the people from the government who may attempt to force a self-incriminating confession for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime. The only time that pleading the fifth is not possible is during presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury that discusses cases arising in the Militia or public danger. What this means in layman terms is that one has the right to remain silent and not have to take the stand during his or her trial. The issue in the article pertains to the reason as to why the national missing-children’s movement was sparked. It all began back in 1979 when young Etan Patz disappeared on his way to school.

Read More
998 Words | 4 Pages

The trial began in 2006, evidence upon evidence was brought in to support the 27 counts of murder. The defense brought into question the legitimacy of

Read More
436 Words | 2 Pages

The Twenty-fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution revolves around succession to the Presidency and construct procedures for filling a vacancy in the Vice President’s office, as well as responding to Presidential disabilities. It also supersedes the arguable terminology of Article II, Section 1, Clause 6 of the Constitution, which does not clearly state whether the Vice President becomes the President, or Acting President, if the President dies, resigns, is impeached, or is otherwise unable to honor the powers of the presidency. The Twenty-fifth Amendment is broken down into four sections, all pertaining to the Presidency, and what should happen if anything goes wrong. In regards to the Vice president becoming president, the only

Read More
1757 Words | 8 Pages

In 2007, the respondent Xavier Alvarez attended a meeting as a board member in Claremont, California, where he introduced himself as the following: “I’m a retired marine of 25 years. I retired in the year 2001. Back in 1987, I was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor” (United States v Alvarez 1). In fact, Mr. Alvarez had never received said award, nor had he served in the United States Armed Forces. As a result of making said false statement, Alvarez was indicted under the Stolen Valor Act.

Read More
890 Words | 4 Pages

The problem arose when the police officers said they had not advised Miranda of his right to an attorney. Miranda’s lawyer was concerned that his Sixth Amendment Right had been violated. This case was noticed by the ACLU and was taken to the Supreme Court. This case raised issues within the Supreme Court on the rights of Criminal Defendants.

Read More
1172 Words | 5 Pages

The work of the Rehnquist court were thought to be more conservative and advancing a decrease of legal rights for unlawful suspects, defendants and condemned offenders (Spohn, and Hemmens, 2012). The Rehnquist Courts stance on the right against self- incrimination and the right to remain silent remains the same. Rehnquist voted to reaffirm the court’s 1966 decision in Miranda vs. Arizona based on his thoughts that the totality of the circumstances test being more difficult than Miranda for law enforcement officers to conform to, and for courts to apply in a consistent manner. (Spohn and Hemmens,

Read More
601 Words | 3 Pages

My favorite professor (the only woman in the CRIJ department) was not only a successful attorney but also a politician. She was not afraid to point out how fucked up the local justice system was/is. Every semester we had to watch Laredo and the Law – a documentary about the triple-axe murders that rocked the city. On January 18, 1991, Laredo PD discovered the mutilated bodies of James Smiley (33), Ruben Martinez (22), and Daniel Dueñez (14).

Read More

More about Why Was Salinas Silence A True Exercise Of The Fifth Amendment?

Related Topics

Open Document