Home » News » Criminal Law : Your Constitutional Rights

Overview

Every saint has a past and every sinner a future. Criminal law takes cognizance of this universal truth and every accused is provided with ample rights while deciding whether he/she has committed any offence. Prosecution guidelines provide for certain procedural niceties to be extended to a person accused of crime. After all, the law intends to punish the crime, not the criminal. Adversarial system views crime as a wrongdoing against the state and not against a particular person. The interests of the state are represented by the prosecuting attorney. As such, law views the offender sympathetically and treats him/her as innocent until proved guilty and passes the burden of proving the case to the prosecution. The defendant has a right to be presumed innocent unless and until the State has proven each and every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, for instance, if a culpable mental state is required to prove a crime, the prosecution must prove that it existed at the time of commission of the offence.

Constitutional Rights

The United States Constitution guarantees a wide array of rights to the criminal defendant from the time of arrest through the trial proceedings. These include: the right to be free from any unreasonable search and seizure, to remain silent, to be tried before a judge or a jury, to summon witnesses and compel their attendance to testify on behalf of the defendant, and to confront and cross-examine any witness the State may call. The defendant in a criminal case has a right to a speedy trial and to be represented by an attorney and is entitled to have an attorney appointed by the court, if the defendant is unable to afford one. The defendant also has a right to consult an attorney or family members before pleading guilty or not guilty before the court.

The criminal proceedings begin by the initiation of a complaint by the purportedly injured person, the complainant. The police investigate about the complaint. A formal charging document called a complaint or an indictment brought by a grand jury is filed with a court in the proper jurisdiction.

The Right to Speedy Trial

The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a speedy and public trial, in both state and federal courts, which means that the proceedings are to be completed within a reasonable time after the person being arrested. The defendant has a right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. The Sixth Amendment also guarantees a criminal defendant the right to be tried before an “impartial jury,” which will consider the evidence against the defendant and decide whether to find him/her guilty. In almost all states, the concurrence of twelve jurors is necessary in order to find a defendant “guilty or not guilty.”

Right to be Free from Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the defendant the right to be free from any unreasonable search and seizure. The quintessence of the Amendment is that “every man’s house is his castle” and the rights to be secured in their persons, houses, papers, and other property, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause.”

Privilege against Self-incrimination

The defendant is entitled to a right under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to remain silent during the trial. In other words, the accused person can refuse to answer any questions or make any statements, if such answers or statements establish that the person committed a crime or is in any way connected to some criminal activity. As already mentioned above, the burden of proof of a crime is on the prosecution. However, no one including the prosecutor, the judge, and even the defendant’s lawyer can force the defendant to be a witness against himself/ herself if the person declines to do so. Furthermore, when a defendant exercises his or her right not to testify, the jury is not permitted to take such denial into consideration when deciding the question of liability. Thus, this is a prominent privilege to the criminal defendant. Nevertheless, the defendant cannot selectively answer questions that go against him/her. Once a defendant decides to testify at trial, he/she cannot ordinarily choose to answer some questions but not others. It is to be noted that the Fifth Amendment privilege does not apply when a defendant is fingerprinted, or made to provide a DNA sample in connection with a criminal accusation. Like a criminal defendant, witnesses are also entitled to refuse to answer certain questions by asserting their Fifth Amendment rights. However, this right is not extensive as that of the criminal defendants.

Conclusion

A criminal defendant is presumed to be innocent and accorded all humane considerations during the trial. Justice is not a one sided notion favoring the victim, but it looks at the accused person from a reformative angle. The punishments accorded to the criminal defendant are meant to reform the person and not a retributive measure. As such, in the pursuit of justice, law takes in to consideration, the rights of the accused.

Mr. Smith is a renowned Florida criminal defense attorney . The knowledge, experience, and killer instincts J. Layne Smith has honed over years of civil and administrative trials in insurance related cases makes him force when defending white collar crimes. Simply put, prosecutors do not have the background and depth of understanding Mr. Smith has, and he uses that advantage to the fullest extent, for your benefit.

Overview

Every saint has a past and every sinner a future.  Criminal law takes cognizance of this universal truth and every accused is provided with ample rights while deciding whether he/she has committed any offence.  Prosecution guidelines provide for certain procedural niceties to be extended to a person accused of crime.  After all, the law intends to punish the crime, not the criminal.  Adversarial system views crime as a wrongdoing against the state and not against a particular person.  The interests of the state are represented by the prosecuting attorney.  As such, law views the offender sympathetically and treats him/her as innocent until proved guilty and passes the burden of proving the case to the prosecution.  The defendant has a right to be presumed innocent unless and until the State has proven each and every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.  Thus, for instance, if a culpable mental state is required to prove a crime, the prosecution must prove that it existed at the time of commission of the offence.

Constitutional Rights

The United States Constitution guarantees a wide array of rights to the criminal defendant from the time of arrest through the trial proceedings.  These include:  the right to be free from any unreasonable search and seizure, to remain silent, to be tried before a judge or a jury, to summon witnesses and compel their attendance to testify on behalf of the defendant, and to confront and cross-examine any witness the State may call.  The defendant in a criminal case has a right to a speedy trial and to be represented by an attorney and is entitled to have an attorney appointed by the court, if the defendant is unable to afford one.  The defendant also has a right to consult an attorney or family members before pleading guilty or not guilty before the court.

The criminal proceedings begin by the initiation of a complaint by the purportedly injured person, the complainant.  The police investigate about the complaint.  A formal charging document called a complaint or an indictment brought by a grand jury is filed with a court in the proper jurisdiction.

The Right to Speedy Trial

The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a speedy and public trial, in both state and federal courts, which means that the proceedings are to be completed within a reasonable time after the person being arrested.  The defendant has a right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.  The Sixth Amendment also guarantees a criminal defendant the right to be tried before an “impartial jury,” which will consider the evidence against the defendant and decide whether to find him/her guilty.  In almost all states, the concurrence of twelve jurors is necessary in order to find a defendant “guilty or not guilty.”

Right to be Free from Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the defendant the right to be free from any unreasonable search and seizure.  The quintessence of the Amendment is that “every man’s house is his castle” and the rights to be secured in their persons, houses, papers, and other property, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause.”

Privilege against Self-incrimination

The defendant is entitled to a right under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to remain silent during the trial.  In other words, the accused person can refuse to answer any questions or make any statements, if such answers or statements establish that the person committed a crime or is in any way connected to some criminal activity.  As already mentioned above, the burden of proof of a crime is on the prosecution.  However, no one including the prosecutor, the judge, and even the defendant’s lawyer can force the defendant to be a witness against himself/ herself if the person declines to do so.  Furthermore, when a defendant exercises his or her right not to testify, the jury is not permitted to take such denial into consideration when deciding the question of liability.  Thus, this is a prominent privilege to the criminal defendant.  Nevertheless, the defendant cannot selectively answer questions that go against him/her. Once a defendant decides to testify at trial, he/she cannot ordinarily choose to answer some questions but not others.  It is to be noted that the Fifth Amendment privilege does not apply when a defendant is fingerprinted, or made to provide a DNA sample in connection with a criminal accusation.  Like a criminal defendant, witnesses are also entitled to refuse to answer certain questions by asserting their Fifth Amendment rights. However, this right is not extensive as that of the criminal defendants.

Conclusion

A criminal defendant is presumed to be innocent and accorded all humane considerations during the trial.  Justice is not a one sided notion favoring the victim, but it looks at the accused person from a reformative angle.  The punishments accorded to the criminal defendant are meant to reform the person and not a retributive measure.  As such, in the pursuit of justice, law takes in to consideration, the rights of the accused.


About Author

Layne Smith

Posted on November 23, 2009

17 Comments

  1. jack says:

    Yes~you make some very strong point~~good for you

    I agree 99%

  2. Eric S says:

    I do not know what the answer to today’s sexual offenders is. Labelling is not cutting down on their crimes; it makes them more devious. It also puts someone who has fondled a child, for example, in the same group as the guy who violently rapes which is clearly not right. We have degrees of the offense of murder and I think we should have degrees for sexual offenses also. A large number of the rapes, worldwide, that occur are perpetrated by known sexual offenders who have done their time for a previous crime. And many of them move up to murder after they are turned loose.

    Since sexual offenders are made, not born, the answer is to teach little children differently. In the good old days, boys and girls of the same family grew up playing together, taking baths together, sleeping together with nothing being made of their sexual differences. Now parents who see their little children showing an interest in their different body parts go right into their Hysteric mode leaving little ones to feel bad about sexual differences. Being made to feel bad is a lot different from being made to feel different and respecting those differences. And it makes for a lot of different types of thoughts about the opposite sex.

    It gets further out of whack as children get older, especially if they come from a home where parents are abusive to each other. These parents are teaching their offspring that it is ok to abuse the opposite sex, regardless of which way it goes but it is very often male physical force against female lack of physical force.

    Religious leaders have of late shown that it is ok to mess around with children and their leaders have covered it up. What is a small inexperienced mind supposed to make of this?

    By the time children are teens brought up with this background and running around with raging hormones, they do not know how to deal with, it is small wonder the problem is not worse than it is.

    In the short term, I think they should be kept locked up if they are already into the rape arena. And I think there should be degrees of sexual crimes.

    The definitive answer to sexual predators is a long term one in reality and starts in the home, not the court house.

    Edit: The issues you are talking about here – labels and laws – are bandaids on crater sized wounds.

    Edit: bandaids on crater sized wounds – feel good smokescreen over a huge black hole. A placebo.
    Calling a rapist a registered sex offender and putting him on a list – makes people feel like something is being done. How many rapes has it prevented? Who knows? How many people have turned into paranoid, overacting people – lots! And some even end up criminals themselves because they allow themselves to be motivated by their fear. So some legislator writes a new law. Laws do not prevent crime. They deal with it after the fact. But don't you feel like someone cares whenever a new law that you approve of is signed? Sure you do! I do! But it does not stop the crime.

    If all it took was a law, there would be no murder – Moses gave the world that law eons ago. A Lot of Good that did! The registered sex offender laws serve no purpose but to create a feel good atmosphere and a reason – right or wrong – for some people to become vigilantes. Sit back some day and look at the history of crime anywhere. It snow balls and we (all of us do it) feel like we are addressing the problem with a new law, a new list. The laws we have to protect children do not really protect children but they do make us feel good. Individuals need to take on responsibility and bring up children to respect others, to accept that we are two different sexes; that it is not wrong to be curious as youngsters but it is wrong to treat the other sex and yourself with disrespect.

  3. psychotick says:

    Bush is a criminal and he is dumb. He seems to be a paranoid pathological liar. Can we impeach him for not being mentally competent? He should be held responsible and tried in a federal court of law. He asks for trillions of dollars of our money to fund a senseless war that he lied to start. Yet, for children on his own soil, he vetoes money to support their health insurance. It is unbelievable that some people try to compare Clinton's intern scandal in the same league as Bush's war and deficit that has caused so many US deaths. Did Clinton or Monica kill anyone? No. So don't even compare. As far as Bin Laden, he has lied about trying to catch the actual terrorist that killed so many in 9/11. He has made this war his own by lies and propaganda. I do not know why he has not been charged criminally as of now.

  4. Roy says:

    this to summarize is just an example of distaste for an culture that is not that of whining anti establishment as approved by present day academia. by the way let racism die, don't continue to fan the flames. pc cuts both ways

  5. East Coaster says:

    We hate puppies and kittens too.

    And Elmo.

    Oh yeah and America, we HATE HATE HATE America.

  6. binary b says:

    Unfortunately there are laws made occasionally that violate the rules set forth by the constitution. Sometimes lawmakers try to twist the meaning of the constitution to their own political benefit. It is the duty of the American people to stand up and be counted that we will not allow the constitution to be done away with.

    If we let them fudge on a little bit of it then nothing is going to stop them from doing whatever they want.

    The Constitution of The United States of America is one of the most important documents in ALL of human history. In this country their is only one other document that would be considered more important and that would be the Bible. It is what protects our freedom.

    If there is ever a law that is in violation of the Constitution it can be challenged in the courts. That is why it's so important to appoint judges to the Supreme Court that will take the Constitution for what it says word for word.

  7. 1234567890 says:

    a
    a
    c
    t
    f
    f
    t
    f
    f
    t
    t
    f

  8. Mike says:

    31. C
    33. A
    34. D
    36. A
    37. B

    just type in the question on google and it should help for the rest…

    ~Nami

  9. Chucky & Lucky says:

    Yes, the list of things this administration has done is getting longer too quickly for us to deal with them! Most of his crimes have gone unresolved simply in light of 3 new scandals popping up to take their place. I am glad America voted for change in the midterms!

  10. dms92370 says:

    Anarchy and a displaced Government would arise that's why.

  11. Janis L says:

    Yeah, the whole — "I've got nothing to hide, so why should I care if the govt violates the constitution" — very irrational IMO.

    In honor of Pastor Martin Niemöller:

    First they came for the 6th Amendment, but I hadn't been accused of a crime, so I didn't object to denial of counsel.

    Then they came for the 4th Amendment, but I wasn't talking to anyone overseas, so they wouldn't be monitoring me.

    Then they came for the rest of the 4th Amendment, but I only called my mother, so there was nothing suspicious in my phone records.

    Then they came for the 1st Amendment, but I never associated with criminals, so I didn't worry about being convicted purely based on what other people might do.

    Then they came for the 14th Amendment, but I never really understood the rules for Due Process (and wasn't allowed an attorney), so I didn't object.

    Then they came for the rest of the 1st Amendment, but I never told anyone about what the government was doing, so again I remained silent.

    Then they came for the 5th Amendment, …… and I no longer had the right to remain silent.

  12. dusty says:

    The plight is not communist. The fact is, medical in communist countries are controlled and the cost is low.

    We suffer from the government stepping on our rights. I was cheated out of 54 months of insurance premiums from Westinghouse Savannah River Company because they thought it was funny to forget to tell me that I can use my insurance in China. They also have not given me a cost of living raise in six years on my retirement, just because they got me hurt. The man who injured me got big promotions and raises, just because I am an Evangelical Christian. I asked the name of the hospitals that will take my insurance and this Jew called John decided the information is classified, since they are Department of Energy, Federal Government.

  13. God Save America says:

    Well you have Bush to thank for this situation on all accounts.

  14. Zerox says:

    Dude, I love you.

  15. Justice4All says:

    I hope they give the courtesy of a reach around.

Leave a Reply