QUESTIONS ON MIRANDA 4
Twoyears after the 1966Mirandav. Arizonacase that became the background for Miranda warnings, the congresspassed that aimed at overturning Miranda. The congress passed the 18U.S.C. § thatrequired judges to admit criminal defendant statements if they werevoluntarily made (Ruschmann,2009). Accordingto this law, the admission was to be in disregard to whether theMiranda warnings were given to the suspect or not (Harret al, 2012). However,the court responded to counter the congressional statute. In the caseof Dickerson v. United Statesthe court overruled the §3501 and heldthat the statute had supplanted the requirement of Miranda warningsfrom the police (Ruschmann,2009). The courtheld that the statute assumed that Miranda warnings were notconstitutional, meaning that the congress could not use thelegislation to overrule it.
Inthe Fifth Amendment, theinclusion of protection against self-incrimination was prompted byhistorical practices. One of the practices was unfair summons toinnocent and accused civilians that affected their public integrity(Brezina,2011). Another historicalpractice was juries summoning people to answer charges of seriouscrimes without representation. In addition, there was a practice ofgetting information from people under oath without giving them achance for representation or Miranda warning (Brezina, 2011).Therefore, the Fifth Amendment was enacted to protect people fromself-incrimination.
Thepublic safety exception toMiranda allows the disregard of giving Miranda warnings to protectthe public from danger from the suspect. For instance, a defendantwho is believed to have dangerous weapons like guns is questioned andinterrogated to reveal their location, without Miranda warnings. Thishelps in protecting the public from the danger presented by theinformation that the defendant is withholding(Harr et al, 2012).Moreover, the informationprovided by such interrogation without warning is admissible in courtas evidence that is considered for conviction.
Brezina,C. (2011). TheFifth Amendment: Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, and Due Processof Law. NewYork: The Rosen Publishing Group
Harr,J. S., Hess, M. H., & Orthmann, C. H. (2012). Constitutionallaw and the criminal justice system (5th ed.).Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Ruschmann,P. (2009). MirandaRights.New York: Infobase Publishing