Cameron Miranda
When people are found breaking the law, they are arrested by the police and sometimes there will be a trial. In the federal system and in some states, a grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence for a trial. If there is enough evidence, the person is indicted and the defendant is arraigned. This is when the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty. If the defendant pleads not guilty, the case goes to trial. If the defendant is found not guilty, he is acquitted. If he is found guilty, he is convicted and then sentenced.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| If found guilty | Convicted and sentenced |
| Who sentences the guilty | Usually the trial judge, but sometimes the jury |
| Types of sentence | Fine, incarceration, probation, or the death penalty |
| Rights of the defendant | Presumed innocent, right not to take the stand, right to have evidence obtained through unconstitutional police procedures excluded, right to have incriminating statements allowed |
| If found not guilty | Acquitted |
| If there is enough evidence | Indicted |
| If there is not enough evidence | Charges are dropped |
| If the defendant pleads not guilty | The case goes to trial |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The right to be tried before a jury
If a person is found breaking the law, they are arrested and charged with a crime. The defendant is then arraigned, where they plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, the case goes to trial. In the federal system and in some states, a grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence for a trial. If there is enough evidence, the person is indicted and the trial proceeds.
Snowden's Exposé: Is US Above the Law?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$11.87 $15.89
The right to be presumed innocent
In the US, if someone is found breaking the law, they are arrested and charged with a crime. If the person pleads not guilty, the case goes to trial. In some states, a grand jury decides whether there is enough evidence for a trial. If there is enough evidence, the person is indicted and the trial proceeds. If there is not enough evidence, the charges are dropped.
This right is enshrined in the Constitution and applies to all jury trials. It is one of several rights guaranteed to defendants in serious criminal cases, including the right to be tried before a jury (which can be waived), the right not to take the stand, the exclusion of evidence obtained through unconstitutional police procedures, and the allowance of incriminating statements made by the defendant.
If the prosecution fails to prove the defendant's guilt, the defendant is acquitted and deemed not guilty. This right to be presumed innocent is a crucial safeguard against wrongful convictions and ensures that the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, rather than the defendant having to prove their innocence.
Plea bargaining may also occur, where the defence attorney and prosecutor attempt to reach an agreement to settle the case with the court's approval. This can result in a reduced sentence or charges being dropped in exchange for a guilty plea, but it is not a right guaranteed to defendants and is at the discretion of the prosecution and court.
The Criminal Charges Against David Koresh
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The right to not take the stand
In the United States, a defendant has the right to not take the stand and not testify. This is provided by California Evidence Code § 930, which states that 'a defendant in a criminal case has a privilege not to be called as a witness and not to testify'. However, a defendant can waive this privilege and choose to testify.
There are several reasons why a defendant might choose not to take the stand. One reason is that they are a weak public speaker. For example, if a defendant seemed incredibly nervous while testifying, they may seem guilty. While it is inevitable that a defendant will be nervous, as their life may be ruined if the outcome of the trial is unfavourable, a nervous defendant is often seen as a guilty defendant.
Another reason a defendant might choose not to take the stand is that they wish to exercise their right to remain silent. However, there is no easy answer to whether a defendant should exercise this right or not. If a defendant presents well, is articulate, and the crime is minor, the jury may 'want' or 'need' such testimony.
If a defendant chooses to waive their right to remain silent, they also waive their right to not take the stand. However, it is important to note that the judge is not required to advise a defendant of their right not to testify, even if they are self-represented.
Jesus and Civil Law: A Sinless Life?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The right to have evidence obtained through unconstitutional police procedures excluded
The exclusionary rule is grounded in the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights, and it is intended to protect citizens from illegal searches and seizures. American courts use the exclusionary rule to deter police officers and other government agents from abusing constitutional rights. According to the rule, courts will suppress (exclude) evidence that the government obtains through unconstitutional conduct—often an unlawful search or seizure. The exclusionary rule is also designed to provide a remedy and disincentive for criminal prosecution from prosecutors and police who illegally gather evidence in violation of the Fifth Amendment and its protection against self-incrimination.
The exclusionary rule also protects against violations of the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to counsel. Most states also have their own exclusionary remedies for illegally obtained evidence under their state constitutions or statutes, some of which predate the federal constitutional guarantees against unlawful searches and seizures and compelled self-incrimination.
If you're facing criminal charges, the exclusionary rule may help determine the outcome of your criminal case. However, courts do not automatically exclude evidence unlawfully seized by law enforcement. Your defence attorney must look at the evidence and make the appropriate objections. They can also challenge the use of evidence collected during an unconstitutional search before your criminal trial.
There are several exceptions to the exclusionary rule. For example, evidence initially obtained during an unlawful search or seizure may later be admissible if the evidence is later obtained through a constitutionally valid search or seizure. Illegally obtained evidence might also come in if police relied in good faith on the validity of a search warrant that turns out to be bad.
Obadiah's Courageous Act: Law-Breaking or Moral Duty?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The right to be acquitted if found not guilty
If a person is found breaking the law, they are arrested and charged with a crime. The defendant has the right to be tried before a jury, or they can waive this right and have a judge decide the verdict. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the prosecutor must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant also has the right not to take the stand and incriminating statements of defendants are allowed. If the defendant is found not guilty, they are acquitted.
The right to a fair trial is also protected by the Constitution, which guarantees that defendants have the right to an attorney, the right to confront their accusers, and the right to present evidence in their defence. These rights ensure that defendants have a fair opportunity to defend themselves and that the truth is revealed through a just legal process.
In some cases, plea bargaining may occur, where the defence attorney and the prosecutor try to settle a case with the court's approval. This can result in a reduced sentence or charges being dropped in exchange for a guilty plea. However, the defendant must voluntarily and knowingly accept the plea bargain, and the court must approve it.
Whaling Law Violation: Understanding the Consequences and Ramifications
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
They are convicted and then sentenced. The trial judge usually hands out the sentence, but sometimes the jury does. The sentence may be a fine, incarceration, probation, or, in some states, the death penalty.
They are acquitted.
Sometimes there will be a trial. In the federal system and in some states, a grand jury decides whether or not there is enough evidence for a trial. If there is enough evidence, the person is indicted. If there is not enough evidence, the charges are dropped.
The defendant is arraigned. This is when they plead guilty or not guilty. If they plead not guilty, the case goes to trial.
They are convicted and sentenced.
