Warren Court - Criminal Procedure
Criminal Procedure
The Warren Court aroused bitter controversy with its decisions in CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. The Court sought to provide equal justice by providing criminal defendants with an attorney in felony cases if they could not afford one (GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S. Ct. 792, 9 L. Ed. 2d 799 [1963]). It also ruled that indigent defendants could not be denied the opportunity to appeal their cases or to participate fully in post-conviction proceedings because of a lack of funds to obtain the necessary transcripts or to hire counsel.
The decision in MIRANDA V. ARIZONA, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966), proved to be the Warren Court's most controversial criminal procedure case. The Court required what has come to be known as the Miranda warning: police must inform arrested persons that they need not answer questions and that they may have an attorney present during questioning.
In addition, the Court used the Fourteenth Amendment to incorporate federal constitutional rights, thus making them applicable to the states. Using this process, the Court applied the EXCLUSIONARY RULE to the states. This meant that evidence seized in violation of the FOURTH AMENDMENT could not be used in a criminal prosecution. The Warren Court also applied to the states the federal constitutional right against CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT in the EIGHTH AMENDMENT, the RIGHT TO COUNSEL in the SIXTH AMENDMENT, the right against compelled SELF-INCRIMINATION in the FIFTH AMENDMENT, and the rights to confront witnesses and to a jury trial in all criminal cases, which are guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. These decisions radically changed the criminal justice system and generated criticism that the Court had gone too far in protecting the accused.
User Comments Add a comment…
over 2 years ago
Ronald Besiallon » nimshish ((at)) msn dot com
Tommorow i go to prison because i'm a North American Indian and was forced to take aplea for a crime i did not commit. The judge openly discussed social problems with members of the jury that made me feel ashamed and afraid to be an Indian. There were many other factors invoved in my false prosecution but it just illustrates that the U.S. Constitution means absolutley nothing. Trust me, people, you don't want to be a North American Indian in Manistee County. Unfortunately i cannot afford my appeal and I'm sure the injustice in this community will comtinue. This is a warning to other North American Indians. Stay away from Manistee County if your an Indian and especially don't get charged with anything here. My appeal is complete but I cannot submit because I don't have the money or resources. But these are the factors I am basing my appeal on. Never subjected to due process, nor miranda; nor formally arrested. Never made aware of my rights. Lied to by police to agree to polygraph. Denied a court appointed attorney. Racial issue openly discussed between judge and jurors. Evidence in my case never presented to the jury. Intimidated and threatened by the judge. Verbally abused by myown attorney. Juror allowed to be a final juror that was once my subordinate. I never had a chance to a fair trial and I feel taking a plea was the only option I had for my family. As I said, don't be an Indian here....