Introduction
Constitutional safeguards that have been provisioned by the United States 4 th 5 th and 6 th United States constitutional amendments are implemented to protect both adult and children against their indiscriminate judicial system. The United States Constitution is the overall supreme law which governs the United States of America. Originally the constitution consisted of seven articles which described the national structure of the government. The articles four five and six demonstrates the elements of federalism .
The common issue addressed in the 4 th , 5 th and 6 th United States constitutional amendments is that they are all meant to the fair treatment of people when either they are suspected or arrested from crimes (Vile, 2017). The collective used for referring to the first 10 constitutional amendments of the U.S. is Bill of Rights. The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to identify and evaluate one of the constitutional protection provided by the 4 th , 5 th and 6 th amendments of the United States Constitution as well as how applicable they are to both adult and juvenile court proceedings. In addition, the paper also discusses the impact of these safeguards and how they apply on the ir daily lives (Vile, 2017).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Identifying and evaluating the constitutional safeguards
The fourth United States Constitutional amendment safeguards people from unreasonable searches and seizures of either an individual or their property by the government officials. A search in this manner refers to anything from being frisked by a police officer or demanding a blood test for an individual (Vile, 2017). Unreasonable search can also be conducted in an individual's home or car. A seizure happens when the government takes over the control of an item which in someone’s possession. Seized items are normally produced of evidence when an individual is charged with a criminal offense. According to this amendment, the search police officers are not supposed to provide advice to a suspect that they may refuse search (McGlynn, 2017).
The se amendment s also provides that in situations in which there exists a third - party who has either common authority or equal control over property may consent to the search of the property (Vile, 2017). The Fifth Amendment safeguards against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. In this amendment, witnesses are protected from forced prosecution. In this article, the double-jeopardy clause consists of four different prohibitions, continuous prosecution after acquittal, subsequent prosecution after conviction, prosecution after mistrials and several punishments in the same indictment (Vile, 2017). Pleading the fifth here refers to the refusal to respond to a question because the response would provide self-alleging proofs of an illegal act penalized by fines, forfeitures or penalties. The exclusionary rule gives disincentive to prosecutors and police officers who unlawfully collect evidence in violation of the Fifth constitutional amendments.
The sixth Bill of Rights provides several safeguards the rights of the individuals who are accused of the crime. In this case, the accused has the right to a speedy and fair trial by the jury. An individual is also guaranteed a right to a public trial in this article. This right also safeguards the defendants from hidden proceedings that may allow for the judicial system abuse and serves to inform the public (McGlynn, 2017) .
Impacts of these Safeguards on the Juvenile and Adult courts
Exclusionary rule based on the Fourth Amendment is meant to safeguard citizens from unlawful searches and seizures (McGlynn, 2017). This rule also gives disincentive to prosecutors who unlawfully collect shreds of evidence violating the Fifth Amendment of the Constitutional Bill of Rights. Furthermore, the exclusionary rule applies to the violations of the Sixth constitutional Amendment which allows for the Right to counsel (McGlynn, 2017). In addition, this amendment allows witnesses to be present for trials and give their witnesses in the presence of the accused. Through this, the accused are guaranteed the Right to know the charges against them. In 1996, the United States Supreme court ruled that, together with the Fifth Amendment, this amendment needed what is today referred to as Miranda Warning.
References
Vile, J. (2017). A Companion to the United States Constitution and Its Amendments . Santa Barbara, California: Praeger
McGlynn, M. (2017). Competing Exclusionary Rules in Multistate Investigations: Resolving Conflicts of State Search-and-Seizure Law . The Yale Law Journal. Retrieved from https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/competing-exclusionary-rules-in-multistate-investigations
