1. Miranda Warnings

2. Your Miranda Rights You have the right to remain silent;
Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law;
You have the right to consult with a lawyer and have that lawyer present during the interrogation;

3. Your Miranda Rights Continued
If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed to represent you;
You can invoke your right to be silent before or during an interrogation, and if you do so, the interrogation must stop.
You can invoke your right to have an attorney present, and until your attorney is present, the interrogation must stop.

4. When is it necessary? There are two very basic prerequisites :
The suspect is in police custody
The suspect is under interrogation
If these two things happen and you don’t receive your warning what will happen to the evidence? Also added to that would be any sort of improper custodial interrogation, like torture.

5. Scenario 1
The defendant and his wife were involved in a car accident. The officer arrived shortly after the accident to investigate. The officer asked both the defendant and his wife who was driving and both say it was the wife. Later the scene investigation revealed that the wife’s injuries are consistent with her sitting in the passenger seat during the accident. The officer confronted the defendant with this information and the defendant then admitted that he was the driver. The officer smelled alcohol on the defendant. The officer administered field sobriety tests. The defendant failed the tests, was placed under arrest, and read the Miranda warning. Was the defendant in custody when he admitted to being the driver?
A traffic stop does not constitute “custody” for Miranda purposes. However, the subsequent events may cause a noncustodial encounter to escalate into a custodial one. The mere fact that a suspect becomes the focus of a criminal investigation does not convert a roadside stop into an arrest. Here, the accident investigation may have become a driving while intoxicated (DWI) investigation after the officer discovered that the wife was not the driver. But at the most, it only escalated a consensual encounter into an investigative detention, not arrest or custody.
No, he was NOT in custody.

6. Scenario 2
The defendant was incarcerated on Offense A. The defendant was told by guards that an officer was coming to talk to him. The defendant voluntarily went to the interview. The defendant was not restrained. The defendant gave a statement admitting to Offense B. The interview room was well lit and had two windows with a view to the prison administration offices. The door to the interview room was unlocked. Was the Miranda warning required?
While the defendant was incarcerated there was no added imposition on his freedom of movement or any measure of compulsion above and beyond being in prison.
The Miranda warning was not required.

7. Scenario 3
The defendant was pulled over on a valid traffic stop. The odor of alcohol was detected on him. A field sobriety test was administered. The defendant failed the field sobriety test. The defendant was arrested and taken to the police department. No Miranda warning was given. At the police department the defendant was asked by the officer to take a breath test. The defendant refused. Waste defendant’s refusal to take a breath test admissible against him at a trial?
The defendant was in custody, but asking a defendant to submit to a breath test is not an interrogation. Therefore, his refusal was admissible against him. Remember, the two-prong interrogation test. The requirements for interrogation were not met; therefore, the Miranda warning was not needed.
Yes, his refusal was admissible against him.

8. The Sixth Amendment
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

9. “Right to a speedy and public trial”
How do we define speedy?
Why public?

10. Impartial Jury 12 Angry Men What does it mean to be impartial?
What are some issues that may come with jury selection?

11. “To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation”
Why is this included?

12. “To be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”
Why both?

13. “and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Can you defend yourself in court?

14. Harry Potter in court Public Trial? Jury? Informed of charges?
Witnesses?
Counsel?

15. Gideon v. Wainwright Charged with felony breaking and entering.
Requested a public defender, but not provided one.
Found guilty, sentenced to 5 years in prison
Petitions the Supreme Court
1963
Landmark case related to the Sixth Amendment

16. Primary Document Activity
Analyze the ruling of Gideon’s case.
Why is this important?

17. Gideon v. Wainwright Petitions the Supreme Court
Unanimously decides to throw out his conviction
States must provide defense like in federal court
Landmark case related to the Sixth Amendment

18. Escobedo v. Illinois Escobedo was arrested and taken for questioning.
He was refused a lawyer.
Escobedo confessed to murder

19. Escobedo v. Illinois Appealed to the Supreme Court
Was Escobedo denied the right to counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment?
Decision:
First time the absolute right to silence was mentioned.
Escobedo was not informed of his rights
Relates to 5th/6th Amendments