Right To Counsel: Racial Profiling In Criminal Cases

1195 Words5 Pages
Right to Counsel CJA/364 Jill Violanda Parr October 17, 2011 Professor Scott Horwath Right to Counsel is a right that everyone has when he or she has committed a crime and he or she is arrested for the crime. Right to Counsel is a privilege and is and should be granted to all citizens. Any accused person has the option to invoke the assistance of counsel for their defense. This includes provisions regarding any alleged criminal from the time they are taken into police custody. A court appointed attorney is often granted for preliminary hearings or for those who are not able to afford counsel. The right to counsel clause was an important aspect of constitutional writing because it assisted in the balance that is present in the criminal…show more content…
Many laws have evolved and changed meanings over time, and therefore, the “law of our land” must be applied as accurately as possible for the criminal justice system to work effectively. The original content for which the amendment regarding counsel stemmed from a need to reinforce the standards set by colonial Americans when they were facing the English. The right to counsel was not necessarily a positive state because often the counsel appointed was not working necessarily for the defendant’s best interest. Nowhere does the amendment explicitly state that the accused will be provided counsel by the government (Sonneborn, 2004). There has been an addendum that had to be put in place later to combat any legal issues that would have been faced when integrating the right to counsel clause into the modern criminal justice…show more content…
In the past, States accused of securing representation for those who have been accused, however, they were not competent. The federal court has now created stipulations regarding the knowledge of the lawyer. They must be able to provide an insight on the case for which they have been called, otherwise, different representation must be secured. While many court cases have been presented regarding the right to counsel, there are some limitations that must be considered. A defendant must be represented; however, they do not have the right to choose which counsel they will receive. The attorney must be knowledgeable and competent, but there cannot be any preferential treatment of one lawyer over another based on reputation or perceived abilities of counsel. As long as the attorney has proven to be effective in representing the case, the defendant must be represented by them. Defendants may be able to show just cause about preferring to self-represent, but again, they must show a clear understanding in making the decision to refuse counsel for their case (Tomkovicz, 2002). There are many other limitations of right to counsel, they include the period that is referred to as “noncritical stages”. During these times, the right to counsel is not considered an option. During fingerprinting, lineups, DNA
Open Document