Is Senator Gravel’s alleged arrangement with Beacon Press protected by the Speech and Debate Clause? No Opinion of the Court (White) The Speech and Debate clause of the U.S. Constitution was intended to protect members of Congress from any prosecution that disrupts the legislative process. Therefore, Gravel is justified in his claim that he is protected under it. The aides of a member of Congress are perceived by the Court to be “alter egos” of the member itself. Thus, the Court holds that, by the indistinguishable nature of the characteristics and duties of the members and their aides, the protection provided by the Speech and Debate Clause should be extended to the aides.
Exclusionary Rule Evaluation John Stepney CJA/364 November 5, 2013 Kenneth Overwater Abstract The Fourth Amendment always has protected the three civil rights of liberty, property, and privacy. Under the Fourth Amendment the exclusionary rule was designed to sustain that any evidence that was obtained illegally by government officials is a violation of a defendant's constitutional rights and cannot be used against the defendant in a court of law. The reader will be informed of the rationale and purpose of the exclusionary rule and identify exceptions to the rule. It will also analyze the costs and benefits as well as alternative remedies to the exclusionary rule. Exclusionary Rule Evaluation In the 18th century the exclusionary rule under common law did not allow coerced confessions of defendants to be admitted in trial courts.
The exclusionary rule is to exclude evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement personnel. The exclusionary rule is a court-made rule. This means that it was created not in statutes passed by legislative bodies but rather by the U.S. Supreme Court. The exclusionary rule applies in federal courts of the Fourth Amendment.
al. v. Kelly Ayotte, Attorney General of New Hampshire, “detailing” a drug is: Answer Selected Answer: The process of obtaining promotional material via anonymous surveys. Correct Answer: The process of obtaining promotional and educational information during in person meetings. . Question 11 .0 out of 4 points Incorrect To succeed under the The Lanham Act, a plaintiff must prove which of the following Answer Selected Answer: All of the above.
U.S. Supreme Court Search and Seizure: Arizona vs. Gant 1) The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States Constitution protect against unreasonable searches and seizures of a person and a person’s property. In order to conduct a search, the police must have probable cause and generally, a search warrant is required in order for the police to search. When law enforcement conducts a search without a warrant, the search is per se unreasonable. This means there is a presumption that the search was unreasonable and the burden is on the government to demonstrate that the search was reasonable and not illegal. Search Incident to a Lawful Arrest: The rationale behind this exception is that a person who has been arrested may destroy evidence or use some type of concealed weapon against the arresting officer.
Although “ ‘searches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable,’ ” Brigham City v. Stuart , 547 U. S. 398 , this presumption may be overcome when “ ‘the exigencies of the situation’ make the needs of law enforcement so compelling that [a] warrantless search is objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment ,” Mincey v. Arizona , 437 U. S. 385 . One such exigency is the need “to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence.” Brigham City, supra, at 403. Pp. 5–6. (b) Under the “police-created exigency” doctrine, which lower courts have developed as an exception to the exigent circumstances rule, exigent circumstances do not justify a warrantless search when the exigency was “created” or “manufactured” by the conduct of the police.
The fourth amendment prohibits, "unreasonable searches and seizures", and protects citizens' privacy within reasonable measures. Now, how does this tie into modern technology, and should the use of this information be considered a violation of people's constitutional right to privacy? Police should not be able to obtain information stored by personal devices or their carriers, as the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees privacy to the United States citizens. In that case that the authorities were to use information from a person's personal device without a proper warrant, they would be in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment was established in order to protect the privacies of the United States
Meaning if you don’t have a lawyer then the government shall appoint one to represent you or pay your legal expenses to find one. (Wiki, 2012) the sixth amendment allows several options such as Choice of counsel, Appointment of counsel, Conflict-free counsel, Ineffective assistance of counsel and Pro Se representation. (Wiki, 2012) the right to counsel applies all through the criminal process. State courts must provide counsel at trial to indigent defendants who face even the possibilities of incarceration-and who are charge with any type of crime not just a felony. (Siegel & Worrall, 2010) all defendants have their right to their own counsel and even represent themselves then they waive their right to have an attorney.
If the accused appears in court the money is refunded at trial but if the accused refuses to appear then the money is not refunded and a warrant will be issued for his or her arrest. At the time of an arrest the officer is responsible for reciting the Miranda rights to the accused ("Sixth Amendment", n.d). References Due Process Model Law & Legal Definition. (2013). Retrieved from http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/due-process-model/ The United
Allen Charge-In criminal law, an instruction given by a judge to encourage a deadlocked jury to make a renewed effort to reach a verdict. Named after Allen v. United States (1896). attorney-client privilege- is a legal concept that protects certain communications between a client and his or her attorney and keeps those communications confidential.The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications. [1] The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality the privilege encourages clients to make "full and frank" disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation. A bench trial is a trial[->0] held before