CJ305: Legal Foundations of Criminal Evidence Welcome to Unit 6! Instructor: K. Austin Zimmer, J.D. Make sure you adjust your speakers and audio settings.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
n Admissions n Admissions and Confessions Admissions and Confessions Generally n Under the FRE, any statement made by a party is an admission and can.
Advertisements

Criminal Evidence 6th Edition
Miranda Warning Law Enforcement I.
Chapter Eleven – Confessions and Admissions: Miranda v. Arizona Rolando V. del Carmen.
ADMISSIONS & CONFESSIONS FOR STREET OFFICERS Portland – October 24, 2013 Bangor – October 30,
AJ 104 Chapter 14 Self-Incrimination.
The Government must respect ALL legal rights of all people. It must treat people fairly.
Obtaining Statements and Confessions for use as Evidence
The Investigation Phase Criminal Law and Procedure.
Vivek Barbhaiya and John Coriasco
Do you know your civil rights?
Miranda Rights 5th Amendment
Miranda v. Arizona.
BY: KATIE LOSINIECKI Miranda v. Arizona. Facts Ernesto Miranda was arrested in 1966 for the kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old woman After being interrogated.
Chapter Eleven – Confessions and Admissions: Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Read Miranda v. Arizona Parties Facts Issue.
Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional 11 th Edition John N. Ferdico Henry F. Fradella Christopher Totten Prepared by Tony Wolusky Interrogations,
Miranda v. Arizona A Primer. Miranda Background Dealt with the admissibility of statements made during custodial interrogation under the Fifth Amendment's.
Unit Five Lesson 31 How do the Fourth and Fifth Amendments Protect Against Unreasonable Law Enforcement Procedures.
The 4th & 5th Amendments Search & Seizure Search & Seizure Rights Against Self Incrimination Rights Against Self Incrimination.
1 Chapter 12 Obtaining Statements and Confessions for use as Evidence Obtaining Statements and Confessions for use as Evidence.
Miranda v. Arizona. Facts of the Case Police arrest Ernesto Miranda after the victim identifies him in lineup Police interrogate Miranda for two hours.
{ Criminal Trial Procedure What happens when the police arrest a criminal suspect?
Rights When Arrested Objective 2.01 Recognize types of courts. Business Law.
Criminal Justice Today CHAPTER Criminal Justice Today, 13th Edition Frank Schmalleger Copyright © 2015, © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
MIRANDA AND TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
Chapter 1 The Pursuit of Justice Unit #1 Notes Packet.
Chapter Fifteen Criminal Procedure Before Trial. Introduction to Law, 4 th Edition Hames and Ekern © 2010 Pearson Higher Education, Upper Saddle River,
Law & Justice Chapter 12 Criminal Investigations.
Rights of the Accused Search & Seizure Search & Seizure Right Against Self Incrimination Right Against Self Incrimination Right to Counsel Right to Counsel.
1 Bakersfield College Criminal Justice Charles Feer, JD, MPA Miranda.
Miranda v Arizona Rights of the Accused. Citations 384 U.S. 436 (1966) oDocket # 759 oArgued February 28, 1966 o Decider June 13, 1966.
Aim: What is Criminal Justice? Do Now: What do you think is involved in the criminal justice system?
Miranda vs. Arizona Right to Remain Silent.
Statements and Confessions
CJ210: Interrogation: Purpose, Guidelines, Procedures, and the Miranda Ruling Unit 6 Seminar.
SELF-INCRIMINATION “No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself[.]” The 5 th Amendment “I plead the Fifth!”
Arrests and Miranda.  Right to a grand jury  Protection against double jeopardy  Protection against self-incrimination  Right to due process  Custody.
The Investigation.  Right to remain silent  Right to an attorney  No interrogation should take place before they read  Are a result of the US Supreme.
CJ210: Interrogation: Purpose, Guidelines, Procedures, and the Miranda Ruling Unit 6 Seminar: Miranda, Interrogation, Interviews, and other.
Describe the difference between and interview and an interrogation.
Investigative Constitutional Law Charles L. Feer, JD, MPA Bakersfield College Department of Criminal Justice Investigative Constitutional Law.
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 6 (Chapter 8 – Admissions & Confessions)
 Online Miranda quiz Online Miranda quiz. The constitutional implications of custodial interrogation.
Looking at Miranda Your Right to Remain Silent
Supreme Court Cases on Self Incrimination Sarah Claypoole.
Miranda V. Arizona By: Elise Kloppenburg. Facts of the Case Phoenix, Arizona 1963 Ernesto Miranda, 23 years old Arrested in his home Taken to the police.
Land Mark Supreme Court Cases Assignment
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS: THE INVESTIGATION Chapter 12.
Miranda Warnings. Copyright © Texas Education Agency All rights reserved. Images and other multimedia content used with permission. Objective Students.
Tracing Our Rights
Unit 4 Seminar. Tell me what the Miranda warning is and what it means to you.
CLASS NO. 19 REVIEW. Miranda Rule Before there is “custodial interrogation,” the defendant must be warned of his Miranda rights: –Right to remain silent.
Know Your Rights Santa Teresa High School Intro to LPSCS.
#lawday2016.
Entry Into the System Arrests and Miranda.
Miranda v. Arizona.
#lawday2016.
Miranda Warning Law Enforcement I.
The University of Adelaide, School of Computer Science
Aim: What are the protections offered by the case of Miranda vs
Miranda v. Arizona (1966).
Rights of Criminal Suspects
Miranda Warnings.
Pre-trial arrest and custody
Miranda v. Arizona 1966.
#lawday2016.
Ch. 3-2 The Fifth Amendment Right to Remain Silent
Interrogations and Confessions
Criminal Procedure: Theory and Practice, 2d.
Presentation transcript:

CJ305: Legal Foundations of Criminal Evidence Welcome to Unit 6! Instructor: K. Austin Zimmer, J.D. Make sure you adjust your speakers and audio settings on your computer so you can hear the music.

Any questions???

The Distinction Between a Confession and an Admission According to one court: A confession is an admission of the crime itself. An admission concerns only some specific fact which, in turn, tends to establish guilt or some element of the offense.

Admissions Statements or acts by an accused before trial that are not an acknowledgment of guilt, but do link the accused with a crime or are in some ways incriminating, are admissions. The accused need not intend to incriminate himself or herself for the statement or act to be an admission. An admission may be a simple acknowledgment of being at the crime scene, of being acquainted with the victim of a crime, or even a denial that the defendant was at the scene.

Confessions In the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court developed the exclusionary rule and continues to develop complex and strict rules pertaining to the admissibility of confessions in evidence.

Free and Voluntary For a confession to have been freely and voluntarily made, the person making the confession must have been in a position to exercise complete mental freedom at the time the confession was made. The courts have been strict in their interpretation of what will affect this “complete mental freedom” and have ruled that pressure applied to induce a confession will be considered as an interference with mental freedom and cause the confession to be excluded from evidence at trial.

Miranda v. Arizona Miranda requires the police to warn a suspect in custody: of his or her right to remain silent that anything the suspect says might be used in court against the suspect that the suspect has the right to have counsel present during questioning that counsel will be appointed for the suspect if the suspect cannot afford counsel

Violation of Miranda In the absence of these Miranda warnings and a waiver of the rights to remain silent and to counsel during police interrogation, any statement obtained by the police cannot be used against the accused at trial, even if the statement is not coerced.

Confessions Excluded Due to Violation of Due Process of Law: Coerced Confessions A coerced confession could be unreliable! Even if the confession is reliable, it should be excluded from evidence because the police should “obey the law while enforcing the law.”

The Totality of the Cirumstances Underlying all of the reasons for excluding a coerced confession is the fundamental requirement that a confession must be freely and voluntarily given. The test for voluntariness, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, is the totality of the circumstances.

Exclusion of Confessions Due to Violation of Rights Secured under Miranda v. Arizona Perhaps no legal decision is more widely known by people in all walks of life than Miranda v. Arizona—the case that imposed the requirement that police give warnings to criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.

Miranda Rule The Miranda rule requires that a law enforcement officer read Miranda warnings to a suspect before custodial interrogation. The officer must advise the suspect that the suspect has the right to remain silent, that anything the suspect says can and will be used against the suspect at trial, that the suspect has a right to an attorney being present during questioning, and that if the suspect cannot afford an attorney, one can be provided at no cost to the suspect.

Translators Should Administer Warnings in the Language Other Than English In those situations where the officer is faced with a suspect who either does not speak English or where English is a second language, a different problem is presented.

What Constitutes Custody for Purposes of Miranda? Custody results when a police officer restrains a person in such a way consistent with formal arrest, regardless of the situation or intent of the officer. Anytime a person is taken into custody, the officer is required to give Miranda warnings.

The Formula Custody + Questioning = Miranda + Waiver

What Constitutes Interrogation for Purposes of Miranda? When an officer has a suspect in custody and specifically asks him or her direct questions about the incident under investigation, the officer is engaged in interrogation within the meaning of the Miranda rule.

What Constitutes a Valid Waiver of Miranda Rights? In the Miranda decision, the Supreme Court stated that the prosecution has a “heavy burden” of proof that any claimed waiver of rights by an accused was made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.

What Constitutes a Valid Waiver After a Suspect Asserts His or Her Rights? State of Mind The Court stated that if a suspect, prior to or during interrogation, indicates in any manner that “he wishes to remain silent, the interrogation must cease.” Likewise, the Court said that if an individual says that “he wants an attorney, the interrogation must cease until an attorney is present.”

Exceptions to the Miranda Rule Public safety exception Routine booking questions exception Undercover police questioner exception

Pennsylvania v. Muniz The Justices concluded that questions posed to an arrestee during booking, such as those relating to name, address, weight, eye color, date of birth, and age are within a “routine booking question” exception, “which exempts from Miranda's coverage questions to secure the ‘biographical data necessary to complete booking or pretrial services.’”

Illinois v. Perkins The Court held that “an undercover law enforcement officer posing as a fellow inmate need not give Miranda warnings to an incarcerated suspect before asking questions that may elicit an incriminating response.” The Court said that “[p]loys to mislead a suspect or lull him into a false sense of security that do not rise to the level of compulsion or coercion to speak are not within Miranda's concerns.”

Procedure for Introduction of Confessions A confession is usually introduced through the testimony of the officer to whom it was made.

Any Questions?? Remember the Unit 6 paper!