The Sixth Amendment

The sixth amendment provides more requirements for a fair trial in criminal cases. First, the accused person has the right to enjoy a speedy trial, but that does not mean that the trial will be done within two days, but rather means that, "The country or state cannot make the person sit in jail for a very long time, for example 5 years, while they wait for their trial. This would be very unfair to anyone who is not guilty."; that was mentioned in the website Laws.com. This means that a person cannot wait in jail for committing a crime the rest of his life before proven guilty, that would go against his right of pursuing happiness. The sixth amendment also permits the accused person to know the cause of the accusation and know his accuser, and that leads to the second ideal which is an opportunity or a chance to

The originally Bill of Rights protected the rights of citizens from infringement by the federal government, but made no mention of the states. The Fourteen Amendment, adopted shortly after the Civil War, protected citizenship and individual rights from infringement by state governments. Under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, the United States Supreme Court began to apply the most important rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights against the states. This process began in the early 1900s and is known as the doctrine of selective incorporation. Duncan versus Louisiana was the landmark case in which the court incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial against the states.

The Second Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, (the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution) the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights was planned and sent to the states, and were later ratified on December 15, 1791.The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification (three-fourths of the States) on December 15, 1791.

The Sixth Amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791. It guarantees rights related to criminal prosecutions in federal courts and it was ruled that these rights are fundamental and important. The Sixth Amendment gives the accused the right to speedy and public trial by the impartial jury. The accused has the right to be informed of the nature and reason of accusation and also be confronted with the witness against him as well as obtaining witness in his favor. In this research paper I will provide a thorough analysis of these above rights and give some history of the 6th Amendment.

Clause number three is the Self-Incrimination Clause. This clause protects from a person that has been accused of a crime from being forced to testify against him/herself. We are innocent until proven guilty, it is the job of the state or federal governments to prove guilt. Words can be changed in ways physical evidence cannot. Information from sobriety tests, voice samples etc. are admissible in court,

The sixth amendment states, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and District wherein the crime shall have been committed, which District shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel or his defence.” ("The Bill of Rights and Amendments 11-27.") This amendment means that anyone who is accused of a crime has the right to a quick and public trial. The trial of the accused must be held by an unbiased jury in the area where the crime supposedly

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable search and seizures. (People v. Williams 20 Cal.4th 125.) A defendant may move to suppress as evidence any tangible or intangible thing obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant. (Penal Code §1538.5(a)(1)(A).) Warrantless searches and seizures are presumptively unreasonable. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 119; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 366 (stating searches and seizures conducted outside the judicial process are per se unreasonable unless subject to an established exception).) While the defendant has the initial burden of raising the warrantless search issue before the court, this burden is satisfied when the defendant asserts the absence of a warrant and makes a prima facie case in support. (Williams, supra, 20 Cal.4th 130.) Accordingly, when the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence seized during a warrantless search, they also bear the burden in showing that an exception to the warrant applies. (Mincey v. Arizona (1978) 98 S.Ct. 2408; see also People v. James (1977) 19 Cal.3d 99.) Evidence obtained as a result of an unlawful search and seizure is considered “fruit of the poisonous tree” and should be suppressed. (Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 371 U.S. 471; see also Minnesota v. Dickerson (1993) 508 U.S. 372 (stating unreasonable searches are invalid under Terry and should be suppressed).)

The fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments regards the rights individuals have when coming in contact or in custody with police officers. The fourth amendment is the right of search and seizure. A search is when a police officer goes into a space where the individual bevies they have privacy. A seizure is when a police officer says or does something that an individual would suspect that they are not free to leave police officer contact. The fifth amendment is the right to remain silent and the right to council. The right to remain silent and council only pertain when an individual is in arrest custody. And states "no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process." The sixth

This amendment was a part of the Bill of Rights and adds a number of rights for an accused citizen. These rights include a fair trial, speedy and public trial, an impartial jury, a notice of accusation, a confrontation of the witness, and right to a lawyer. A speedy trial means that the government cannot delay a trial to keep you in jail. A public trial ensures that rules a being followed correctly. An impartial jury means that they will not convict you without sufficient evidence. A notice of accusation forces the government to tell you what you did wrong. A confrontation of a witness is that people who saw the crime must testify. A right to a lawyer means that you have the right to have a lawyer even if you do not have the money for one.

America is built on the foundation of society being run and well-flowing around the three values the Republic of the United States hold most dear to: equality, freedom, and justice. The rights of the accused is an important factor in maximizing justice. Amendments 4-8 in the Bill of Rights specifically detail how criminal law should be dealt with, and how justice can be ensured every step of the way. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments contain two systems that go hand in hand with one another, a due process and a trial by jury for all citizens. Amendments 4-8, a Due Process, and a Trial by Jury are essential for establishing the rights of the accused and their absence would be detrimental to the effectiveness of the American criminal justice system.

The Sixth Amendment provides that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a(n) speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury.

The Fourth Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights which was established in the seventeenth and eighteenth century English common law. Aside from the rest of the amendments in the Bill of Rights the Fourth Amendment can be traced back to a strong public reaction from some cases back in the 1760s. Two of these cases happened in England and one case happened in the colonies. These cases involved some pamphleteers who would pass out pamphlets to the public in order to spread their word around. These pamphlets however ridiculed the king and his ministers. After finding this out the king issued warrants to have the pamphleteer’s homes ransacked and stripped of all their books and papers. Even back then the pamphleteers knew that their rights

The Sixth Amendment is, assuring the accused right to a speedy and public trial, right to be represented by an attorney, and right to be faced by accusing witness. The Sixth Amendment was proposed in, 1791. Amendment Six is about having an attorney present at court to make a fair trial. If you can’t afford one the court will appoint one to you. For example, Clarence Gideon vs Louie Wainwright. In this particular case, Gideon could not afford an attorney , yet the judge did not appoint one to him so he went to prison. After he was sent to prison he sent a letter to the Supreme Court, then he got a retrial and won. The Sixth Amendment was proposed because people who didn’t have an attorney could not have a fair trial against a person who had

In this case, a black man was convicted guilty in court for rape; however, he had not been informed that he had the right to be represented by a lawyer. Because of this, the judges looked at the case as being an unfair conviction. As a result, both state and federal courts are required to inform a defendant of their rights and grant them an attorney.

Moving on, the last two Amendments set forth by the United States Constitution that can justifiably be waived in the event of national security are the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. To quickly define the Fifth Amendment in the United States Constitution “sets forth several restrictions” on how the government may, or may not treat a person who is a suspect of a crime (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 24). Similarly the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution disuses the “requirements for a fair trial” (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, & Kingsbury, 2015, p. 24). However, in the interest of national security some individuals Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights have not been upheld. To better elaborate, according to one source, after the events that