Miranda and Grand Jury System

MIRANDA AND GRAND JURY SYSTEM 4

Mirandaand Grand Jury System

Mirandaand Grand Jury System

Question4

Mirandawarnings are not required in the case of an interrogation of asuspect to expose more crimes in the case for undercover policeoperations. The undercover police interrogations are deemed to bedirected to informants and therefore require no Miranda warnings(Prentzas,2005).Secondly, Miranda warnings need not be read in the case of Jailhouseinterrogations, especially in the crimes that are not related to thecurrent incarceration.Thirdly, Miranda warnings are not required when questioning an inmateabout a second crime in prison.

Question5

Thestandard for determining the voluntariness was adopted by the courtin the Mirandav. Arizona case. TheSupreme Court applied the common-law test to determine thevoluntariness of a confession prior to a Miranda. In determining thevoluntariness, the court explored the totality of the circumstancesthat surrounded the confession to a Miranda. This was done to whetherthe confession was a coerced event or a voluntary. According toRussano and Kovera (2000), there are several eventualities andmethods the police can use to fulfill the Miranda rights. Therefore,the court adopted the voluntariness test to establish the guidelineof the Miranda circumstances.

Question6

Oneof the advantages of the grand jury system is that it gives aplatform for conducting a legal run of a case of a jury before acriminal trial. This system provides the prosecutor with a system oftaking a case before a grand jury to determine whether he has strongevidence before taking the case to the trial chambers (Harr et al,2012). However, the grand jury system is accused of favoring theprosecution at the expense of the suspect. This is critiqued as a wayof the prosecution getting confession from the suspect, eitheragainst him or against other suspects.

References

Harr,J. S., Hess, M. H., &amp Orthmann, C. H. (2012). Constitutionallaw and the criminal justice system (5th ed.).Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Prentzas,G.S. (2005). MirandaRights: Protecting the Rights of the Accused.New York: The Rosen Publishing Group

Russano,M., &amp Kovera, M. B. (2000). SupremeCourt revisits Miranda warnings.RetrievedFrom, &lthttp://www.apa.org/monitor/mar00/jn.aspx&gt October 16,2014