Access over 20 million homework & study documents

search

Week 8 Discussion

Content type
User Generated
Rating
Showing Page:
1/3
The Right to Counsel
The Sixth Amendment has really helped the criminal defendants in their quest for trying
to prove their innocence. We currently live in world whereby there are diverse groups of
persons. There are the rich and at the same time, there are the poor people. When these two
people face in court, the battle may be seamlessly over before it starts. This might and will
actually inconvenience one party while the other party has an easy court battle. For instance,
let us take this scenario. A rich person is convicted of murder or maybe even of rape.
Further, let us assume that the victim is a poor girl who probably works for him in his
house or as his secretary. Clearly, there is a large deficit between these two persons in terms
of finances. If these two people face in court, the rapist will hire competent lawyers and those
who are best in whatever it is that they do. The victim on the other hand may be left
unattended without the necessary legal counsel. Inasmuch as the evidence will point towards
the criminal defendant, chances are that without the necessary legal counsel, the criminal
defendant will walk out scot free.
Therefore, there is no justice served and the justice system would be a rich man’s
playing ground. However, the Sixth Amendment guarantees the criminal defendant of having
adequate legal representation. Even if they are unable to afford for these services, the state has
got their backs by offering them state attorneys who are paid by the government (What the
Sixth Amendment Guarantees, n.d.). The right to counsel during the interrogation phase,
during the actual trial, sentencing and any appeal. The state has accorded the criminal
defendants with some rights. Furthermore, this not only applies to the American citizens.
Rather, it also applies to the foreigners who are tried in a United States court.

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
2/3
A landmark court ruling that brought the issue into light is the Miranda versus Arizona
case. This was in the year 1966 when Miranda, the criminal defendant was arrested and
accused of rape, robbery and kidnapping. He was then taken into police custody where the
victim identified him and afterwards, he was taken into interrogation. Surprisingly, the
interrogation went ahead for two long consecutive hours after which there was a signed
confession from Miranda.
In the case, Miranda’s rights were very much violated. He had no rights, or so it may
seem, after being in an interrogation room for two consecutive hours. Once a criminal
defendant has invoked his right to counsel, the government, and most notably, the police,
have no right to interrogate the suspect. The following are some of the rights that Miranda
was deprived of:
The right to remain silent
Anything that you say can and will be used against you in court
You have the right to an attorney now or in the future
If you are unable to afford an attorney, one will be appointed to free of charge by the
government.
If the suspect states that he wants his lawyer, the questioning and interrogation must
cease immediately while awaiting the arrival of the lawyer.
However, the Miranda rights are no guarantee of not being arrested. Rather, they help the
criminal suspect not to incriminate themselves. They further need to know that all the police
need is probable cause for an arrest to be conducted. Arrests are not covered by the Miranda
rights. Rather, these rights assist in helping the defendant not to incriminate themselves and

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
3/3

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Unformatted Attachment Preview
The Right to Counsel The Sixth Amendment has really helped the criminal defendants in their quest for trying to prove their innocence. We currently live in world whereby there are diverse groups of persons. There are the rich and at the same time, there are the poor people. When these two people face in court, the battle may be seamlessly over before it starts. This might and will actually inconvenience one party while the other party has an easy court battle. For instance, let us take this scenario. A rich person is convicted of murder or maybe even of rape. Further, let us assume that the victim is a poor girl who probably works for him in his house or as his secretary. Clearly, there is a large deficit between these two persons in terms of finances. If these two people face in court, the rapist will hire competent lawyers and those who are best in whatever it is that they do. The vict ...
Purchase document to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Anonymous
Nice! Really impressed with the quality.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4