How The Courts Address Or Respect Our Rights As Citizens Presentation

Full Answer Section

• Miranda filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing that his confession was obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights.
• The case went to the Supreme Court.

Issues:

• Does the Fifth Amendment require police to inform suspects of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney before questioning them?

Holding:

• Yes, the Fifth Amendment requires police to inform suspects of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney before questioning them.

Concurring/Dissenting Opinions:

• Justice Harlan wrote a concurring opinion, arguing that the Miranda warnings should be applied to all custodial interrogations, not just those involving serious crimes.
• Justice White wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the Miranda warnings were not necessary to protect the Fifth Amendment rights of suspects.

Mapp v. Ohio

Facts:

• Dollree Mapp was suspected of harboring a bombing suspect.
• Police officers entered her home without a warrant and seized obscene materials.

History:

• Mapp filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from her home, arguing that the search was illegal because it was conducted without a warrant.
• The case went to the Supreme Court.

Issues:

• Does the Fourth Amendment require police to obtain a warrant before conducting a search of a person's home?

Holding:

• Yes, the Fourth Amendment requires police to obtain a warrant before conducting a search of a person's home.

Concurring/Dissenting Opinions:

• Justice Stewart wrote a concurring opinion, arguing that the exclusionary rule was a necessary remedy for Fourth Amendment violations.
• Justice Harlan wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the exclusionary rule should not be applied to cases where the police acted in good faith.

Gideon v. Wainwright

Facts:

• Clarence Gideon was charged with petty theft in Florida.
• He was denied an attorney by the court, even though he could not afford one.

History:

• Gideon filed a petition for habeas corpus, arguing that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel had been violated.
• The case went to the Supreme Court.

Issues:

• Does the Sixth Amendment guarantee the right to counsel in all criminal cases, regardless of the severity of the offense?

Holding:

• Yes, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel in all criminal cases, regardless of the severity of the offense.

Concurring/Dissenting Opinions:

• Justice Black wrote a concurring opinion, arguing that the right to counsel is fundamental to a fair trial.
• Justice Harlan wrote a dissenting opinion, arguing that the Sixth Amendment only guarantees the right to counsel in serious criminal cases.

These three cases are just a few examples of how the courts have addressed the rights of citizens. The courts play an important role in protecting our rights and ensuring that the government does not act in an arbitrary or unfair manner.

Sample Solution

How the Courts Address or Respect Our Rights as Citizens

This presentation will discuss three landmark Supreme Court cases that have had a significant impact on the way the courts address our rights as citizens. These cases are:

• Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
• Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
• Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)

Miranda v. Arizona

Facts:

• Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape.
• He was interrogated by police for two hours without being informed of his right to remain silent or his right to an attorney.