in which of the following cases did police refuse a defendant’s request to see his attorney?

Which case established certain safeguards for individuals being questioned by the police?

In which of the cases listed below did police refuse a defendant s request to see his attorney? (Points : 1) ʹ Brown v. Mississippi Ashcraft v. Tennessee Miranda v. Arizona Escobedo v. Illinois

What information can the defendant not see on a police report?

In which of the cases listed below did police refuse a defendant's request to see his attorney? Escobedo v. Illinois ... In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court blur the distinctions between an initial appearance and an arraignment????? In a well-regulated society, laws are considered to be essential in order to mold human conduct

When does an attorney refuse to take a case?

n which of the cases listed below did police use a rookie police officer to trick the defendant into confessing: Spano v. New York. In which of the cases listed below did police refuse a defendant's request to see his attorney: Escobedo v. Illinois

When must the court appoint a counsel to represent the defendant?

The police asked permission to “look around” the house. The defendant refused the request and the police proceeded to search the home anyways. The police also made the defendant’s wife remove contents of various dresser drawers. The police seized coins and medals which were later used to convict the defendant of burglary. Issue.

In which case did the US Supreme Court hold that the defendant has the right to counsel during the course of any police interrogation group of answer choices?

If a defendant demands the presence of counsel during police interrogation, police must stop the interrogation until the defendant's counsel is present. In Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of counsel applies to state criminal proceedings as well.

In which case did the Supreme Court hold that suspects who are being interrogated have the right to the assistance of counsel prior to formal indictment?

In Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625 (1986), the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment bars the police from initiating any interrogation of a defendant who has been formally charged and who has requested the right to counsel.

In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court blur the distinctions between an initial appearance and an arraignment?

4: In which cases did the supreme court blur the distinctions between an initial appearance and an arraignment? McNabb v.

In which of the following cases did the US Supreme Court hold that once a defendant asks for an attorney all questioning must stop?

The Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), which gave us the well-known Miranda warnings, requires police to cease any and all interrogation once a person has invoked the right to an attorney, and it holds that any statements made afterwards are inadmissible in court.Oct 16, 2021

Who won in Miranda v. Arizona?

The case went to trial in an Arizona state court and the prosecutor used the confession as evidence against Miranda, who was convicted and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. Miranda's attorney appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, which upheld the conviction.

What was Arizona's argument in Miranda v. Arizona?

Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.

In which of the following cases did the court hold that an accused has a right to represent him herself?

The case that established that defendants have a right to represent themselves was Faretta v. California, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1975. The Faretta case said that a judge must allow self-representation if a defendant is competent to understand and participate in the court proceedings.

Which case held that the prosecutor could not exclude a racial group from the jury solely because of their membership in the group?

Batson v. KentuckyKentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race.

When the verdict is guilty the judge usually determines the?

In most criminal cases, there is a single trial in which the jury determines whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. If the jury returns a verdict of guilty, the judge then determines the sentence.

In what case did the Supreme Court hold that the Sixth Amendment guarantees that indigent poor criminal defendants receive legal representation?

1963Right To Counsel For Indigent Extended To States In Gideon v. Wainwright , the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously extends to state court trials the rule it established for federal court trials nearly 30 years earlier in Johnson v.

In which case did the Supreme Court rule that a person accused of a serious crime must be provided with an attorney if he or she was too poor to afford one?

Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide attorneys to criminal defendants who are unable to afford their own.

What was the main issue in the court case Gideon v. Wainwright?

In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution requires the states to provide defense attorneys to criminal defendants charged with serious offenses who cannot afford lawyers themselves. The case began with the 1961 arrest of Clarence Earl Gideon.

What happens if a defendant is found guilty by a jury?

If the defendant is found guilty by a jury, the defendant may: Appeal the conviction without the consent of the judge or prosecution.*** . 15) A guilty plea is equal to a conviction; if a defendant enters a plea of guilty, the defendant: Must have that fact explained to him before the plea is accepted.

What is the purpose of the 4th amendment?

The fourth amendment provides the right of the people to be secure in their: Houses and papers. Ch2: The major purpose of the exclusionary rule is to: Deter unreasonable searches and seizures. Ch2: The "Fruits of the poisonous tree" doctrine applies to: Arrests, confessions, and searches.

Why is the exclusionary rule not applicable?

United States, the supreme court held that: -The exclusionary rule was not applicable when the government learns of evidence from a source independent of any taint, -Not all evidence is barred simply because it may have been gathered in violation of the constitution, and that. -Illegally obtained evidence may be admitted if it could have been ...

Can a ruling on evidence be assigned as error?

A ruling on evidence cannot be assigned as error unless: -A substantial right is affected and the nature of the error was called to the attention of the trial judge. 10) Relevant evidence may be excluded on the grounds of: Prejudice, confusion and to admit the evidence would be a waste of time.

Is warrantless search reasonable?

Where there is probable cause to search and there is a clear danger that the items which are the subject of the search may be removed prior to police obtaining a search warrant, a warrantless search of the area beyond an arrestee’s immediate control is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

Did the police have the defendant's wife open drawers?

The defendant refused the request. The police proceeded nonetheless, incident to the lawful arrest and searched in different rooms. The police also had the defendant’s wife open various dresser drawers and remove their contents. Synopsis of Rule of Law.

What is the purpose of cross-examination in a murder trial?

Under cross-examination, the officer reveals details of the interrogation that suggest it is likely that the defendant was coerced into confessing.

What amendment does Sergeant Hernandez violate?

Sergeant Hernandez must evaluate if the level of force used by Officer Williams is a violation of an inmate's Eighth Amendment protections. Which Supreme Court case held that the use of force by prison officials violates an inmate's Eighth Amendment protections only ...

What does the inmate ask you for when you count heads?

As you make your rounds to count heads, one of the inmates asks you if you'd bring him a piece of dental floss. He says he has an uncooked grain of rice from dinner stuck in his back teeth and it is very painful. He only needs a small piece, surely not enough to pose any problem.

Can you use dental floss in prison?

According to prison rules, dental floss may only be used in the shower area, under observation. It is apparent to you that the inmate is in discomfort, and you know this inmate to be well-behaved. Another officer, a veteran, sees that you have retrieved dental floss and asks what you intend to do with it.

Can a defendant see a police report?

Understand that it is a misdemeanor for the attorney to give the defendant a police report or other investigation report which contains biographical information/contact information on the other parties to the offense. The defendant can see the names. However, the defendant cannot see birthdates, phone numbers, addresses, employment, etc. - information often noted on such reports.

Can you redact police reports?

Yes you have the right to review the evidence and can receive redacted copies of the police reports. Robert Driessen. Mr. Driessen is a former Deputy DA in Orange County with over 8 years of criminal law experience.