By: Holden Luce.  Mapp was accused of harboring a criminal involved in a bombing case.  The Officers confronted Mapp at her home and demanded that she.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Supreme Court Case Review The Rights of the Accused
Advertisements

Click on the arrow to begin the quiz.. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Katz v. United.
What would society look like if Eric Cartman was a police officer.
The Investigation Phase Criminal Law and Procedure.
Vivek Barbhaiya and John Coriasco
POP QUIZ How did the Courts increase the political power of people in urban areas and those accused of a crime? GIVE AN EXAMPLE.
Warren Court. Warm-up Do you have rights when you are being arrested? What rights do you have?
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.
Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Read Miranda v. Arizona Parties Facts Issue.
Miranda v Arizona Escobedo v Illinois By Austin Lallier.
Miranda vs. Arizona 1966.
The Criminal Amendments: Rights of the Accused Trends Over Time
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
Our Criminal Justice System
Objective 29L Analyze he rights of the accused as set forth in the 4 th,5 th,6 th,8 th, and 14 th Amendments, including but no limited to such cases as.
Miranda v. Arizona. Facts of the Case Police arrest Ernesto Miranda after the victim identifies him in lineup Police interrogate Miranda for two hours.
Objective 29l-Analyze the rights of the accused Kelsey McLaughlin and Kelsey Bois Kelsey McLaughlin and Kelsey Bois.
U.S. Constitutional Amendments 1-10
Court Cases dealing with Individual Rights (Bill of Rights) J. Worley Civics.
Reem K, Madeline R, Miranda G, Emily K, & Britney F Government 4 th Hour Mr. Baker.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases: Mr. Blough Academic Civics.
An Overview of The Mapp, Gideon, Escobedo, and Miranda cases. Copyright 2010; The Nichols Law Firm, PLLC; By Atty. Brendon G. Basiga.
Exemplar.  1.Right to an attorney (6 th Amendment) 2.Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (4 th Amendment) 3.Freedom from cruel and unusual.
Rights Warning/Waiver Certificate
Chapter 1 The Pursuit of Justice Unit #1 Notes Packet.
Gideon vs Wainwright 1963 By: Amanda Snizek Period 6.
Call To Order Complete the following statement: You have the right to remain silent… And take out your homework!!!
Miranda vs. Arizona Right to Remain Silent.
Mapp vs. Ohio B. The Court decided that the Exclusionary Rule, excluding evidence taken illegally from a search, is not admissible in court. EXPANDS our.
Ashley Nine March 25, 2010 Period 7.  Poor living immigrant from Mexico living in Arizona.  He was charged with rape and kidnapping.  He was arrested.
Unit 4 Lesson 7: Gideon v. Wainwright
Homework: Read/OL 14.3 for Monday FrontPage: Have 3 worksheets on your desk.
How have the decisions of the Supreme Court protected people accused of crimes? What rights are accused people guaranteed? Landmark Supreme Court Cases.
Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda 1966 Charged & convicted of kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery charges second trial, with his confession excluded.
Arrests and Miranda.  Right to a grand jury  Protection against double jeopardy  Protection against self-incrimination  Right to due process  Custody.
Miranda v. Arizona GREYSON PETTUS PLS 211 MR. NOEL DECEMBER 2ND, 2015.
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.
How have the decisions of the Supreme Court protected people accused of crimes? What rights are accused people guaranteed? Landmark Supreme Court Cases.
Supreme Court Cases of the 60s. Mapp v. Ohio, 1961 What happened? - illegal search of home found “obscene materials”. Mapp was convicted. Brought to court.
Supreme Court Cases. Marbury v Madison Issue: Should the Constitution be very strictly interpreted or is there room for interpretation? If there.
Miranda: Its Meaning and Application Chapter 6 Basic Criminal Procedures, 3/E by Edward E. Peoples PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle.
DUE PROCESS. Procedural Due Process v. Substantive Due Process Procedural follows a set procedure, the same for all the accused Such as counsel, unreasonable.
Aim: How did the Warren Court expand civil rights for everyone?
Entry Into the System Arrests and Miranda.
Miranda v. Arizona.
Miranda Rights.
Miranda Rights Reem K, Madeline R, Miranda G, Emily K, & Britney F
Landmark Cases Mapp v. Ohio Tinker v. Des Moines Miranda v. Arizona
Defining the meaning of the terms in the warning
Aim: What are the protections offered by the case of Miranda vs
By Michael Cleary Period 8 10/3/13 College Business Law Mr. Como
Important Court Cases of the 20th Century
The Warren Court By Rebecca Johnson.
Liberalism vs. Conservatism
LANDMARK SUPREME COURT CASES:
DUE PROCESS.
Miranda v. Arizona 1966.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) The Warren Court.
Landmark Supreme Court Cases
Clarence sues Louie You decide the outcome.
Rights Warning/Waiver Certificate
Defendants’ Rights Edgenuity Lessons 3.4 and 3.5.
by Marcos Cardona-7th period
5th, 6th, 7th Amendment Rights
Miranda v. Arizona Matthew & Noah.
The Warren Court AP US History.
DUE PROCESS.
The 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments
Presentation transcript:

By: Holden Luce

 Mapp was accused of harboring a criminal involved in a bombing case.  The Officers confronted Mapp at her home and demanded that she turn him over.  The officers “Claimed” to have a warrant.  While the officers searched the home for the fugitive they found a box of obscene photos which were illegal in Ohio at the time.

 When Mapp was taken to court the officers were unable to produce a warrant.  After the case was taken to the supreme court it was decided that the 4 th amendment protects citizens against unlawful searches and that the evidence obtained by the Ohio officers was to be thrown out.

 Gideon was seen walking out of a pool room with a bottle of wine and his pockets full of coins.  The owner of the pool room confirmed that money was taken and that a few bottles of beer and wine were missing.  After he was taken to court he defended himself and was later found guilty.

 While in jail Gideon studied the 6 th amendment and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court against the Secretary to the Florida Department of corrections Louie Wainwright.  Gideon argued that the states 14 th amendment had violated his 6 th amendment because he was not offered counsel.  In the end Gideon was retried with a state lawyer and was aquited.

 Miranda was arrested because of Massive amounts of evidence that linked him to the raping and kidnapping of an 18 yr old girl 10 days earlier.  After two hours in a interrogation room Miranda signed a confession that stated that he had done this voluntarily and he had heard his rights.  Miranda was convicted to 20 to 30 years but appealed saying that he was not offered any of his rights.

 The State argued that Miranda did not specifically ask for counsel and that it wasn’t their place to give him one if he didn’t ask for one.  Miranda was retried and sentenced to 20 to 30 years again, He got parole in ‘72 and returned to his old neighborhood autographing police cards.  He was stabbed to death in ‘76 after an argument.

 Mapp Vs Ohio affirmed the right that people had against illegal searches.  Gideon Vs Wainwright affirmed the right that people had the right to an attorney even if they couldn’t afford one.  Miranda Vs Arizona affirmed the right that people had when being arrested and being interrogated. (Miranda Rights)

 ona ona  wright wright   /1962/1962_ /1962/1962_155