Privileges Of Miranda - Best Essay Writing Service Reviews Reviews | Get Coupon Or Discount 2016
Free Essays All Companies All Writing Services

Privileges of Miranda

Following the Supreme Court ruling in Miranda v. Arizona case, defendants are entailed to the privilege of having a legal counsel during interrogation. According to the ruling, unless the crime suspect asserts their right to self-representation, the law enforcement there right to a counsel must be respected (FindLaw, 2010). In addition, for economically challenged suspects, a public attorney should be appointed for them, failure to which evidence collected during the interrogation remain inadmissible in court.

Another privilege of Miranda is that a crime suspect must be informed of their constitutional rights during arrest and while in custody. The law enforcement officers are legally bound by the law to clear inform the suspects of their right to be free from self incrimination. Such serve the purpose of enlightening the suspect that whatever they say during interrogate will be used as evidence against them in court (FindLaw, 2010). This entails that one has the right to remain quite during the interrogation process.

This is quite instrumental in mitigating forced interrogation practices by the law enforcement. In addition, the Miranda v. Arizona case ruling mitigates abuse of authority by law enforcement during arrest and interrogation. Based on the court ruling, for a crime suspect to waive their right to a legal counsel during interrogation, the decision should be intentional and based on intellect (FindLaw, 2010). This has the implication that the mentally ill and juvenile crime suspects are protected from self incrimination since their intellect to assert self-representation remains questionable.

On the other hand, the ruling dictates for sufficient evidence of defendant waiving their right to counsel by the prosecution while presenting evidence collected without a legal counsel. All these Miranda privileges are crucial in ensuring justices during arrest, detention and interrogation of a crime suspect. References FindLaw. (2010). U. S. Supreme Court MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, 384 U. S. 436 (1966), Retrieved June 6, 2010, from http://caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/scripts/getcase. pl? court=us&vol=384&invol=436

Sample Essay of