Discuss the difference between an arrest and a custodial interrogation. When must Miranda be given to an individual?
An arrest refers to placing a person in custody for a possible offense. During an arrest, the person is handcuffed. When an individual is arrested for a probable offense, the police officers, using their legal authority, take away the person’s freedom of movement (Bang et al., 2018). In most cases, the police must have an arrest warrant for them to conduct an arrest. However, when an individual commits an offense, they are put under arrest. Here, the police officers have the right to put the individual into custody without an arrest warrant. In such instances, the arrest and search warrant is not needed if the police officers find enough probable cause to arrest the individual. For instance, when a person kills someone at the shopping mall, police can spontaneously take action. In this case, the police do not need an arrest warrant to put the person into custody because of enough evidence, witnesses, and probable cause. Miranda is given to an individual so that he can be aware of his rights, and it is given after an arrest is made.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
On the other hand, custodial interrogation involves taking a suspect into custody without handcuffing them. In this case, the suspect is arrested and denied the freedom of action in any way. In custodial interrogation, the police put a suspect into custody for questioning (Bang et al., 2018). The suspect is interrogated so that the police can obtain certain information regarding a particular crime being investigated. Custodial interrogation allows police to establish if an arrest will take place based on the interrogation outcomes. In this case, the Miranda will be given to the suspect on custodial interrogation (Alschuler, 2017). Afterward, the suspect will decide if they will contribute to the interrogation and corporate with the police or remain silent after reading the Miranda rights.
Discuss how the court determines if a confession should be admissible or not. What does the court look for to determine if a confession is voluntarily given?
It is essential for police to evaluate the confession to know if it will be admissible in court or not. A confession becomes admissible in court if the police officer did inform the suspect about the Miranda warning before they make confessions (Taylor, 2015). The confession would not be of importance during the trial if the individuals were not informed about the Miranda rights by the police. The confessions will not be admissible and used as evidence in courts when the suspect is denied of the Miranda rights (Taylor, 2015). The court will evaluate if the confession was made voluntarily or involuntarily. If it was voluntary, the confession becomes admissible since no rights of the individual were violated.
Discuss when an individual has the right to counsel. Is this right absolute? What other safeguards does the Sixth Amendment afford a criminal defendant?
An individual or a suspect has the right to counsel when they are in custody for interrogation. Every individual has the right to counsel whether they can afford it or not. Several individuals think that they will not get counsel if they cannot afford one. Those who cannot afford a counsel will be given an attorney to work on their case. The Sixth Amendment provides a suspect or criminal certain human rights, and no one is allowed to deny them no matter who is under arrest or the type of crime committed. Following the Sixth Amendment, the criminal has “the right to be notified on nature of the charges and evidence against them, the right to a lawyer, right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, right to know the one’s accusers, and right to an impartial jury” (Alschuler, 2017). The above are the rights taken into considerations when an individual is facing criminal charges.
References
Alschuler, A.W. (2017). Miranda's fourfold failure. Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers . https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/public_law_and_legal_theory/663
Bang, B. L., Stanton, D., Hemmens, C., & Stohr, M. K. (2018). Police recording of custodial interrogations: A state-by-state legal inquiry. International Journal of Police Science & Management , 20 (1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461355717750172
Taylor B. (2015). You have the right to be confused! Understanding Miranda after 50 years. Pace Law Review , 36(1). https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol36/iss1/5
