Rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments vary. Their impact does take on a whole new light when you scope out the criminal proceeding type of jurisdictional stance if it’s looked at from a different scope and a different perspective when carrying on in the action of law. The Fourth Amendment for police officers has an impact on the everyday working person as they are commuting on highways and are subject to traffic stops for violation of codes. Police officers are given the legal authority to pull over individuals that have been suspected of committing a traffic violation. If upon the officer pulling someone over, he can legally search the car only with probable cause. For example most people understand that we intrinsically have a right to freedoms and for you to have the ability to reveal what part of your life to the public you want is up to you as a person. The Fourth Amendment protects you against “unreasonable search” and seizures by state or federal law enforcement. Authorities cannot, by law, search your vehicle or your person without probable cause. If the officer illegally seizes evidence in that search they cannot use it against a person in a trial. This is also known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine” wherein evidence that was seized from an officer from a direct result of an improper search cannot by law be admissible at trial.
The Fourth Amendment remands fuzzy as to what the definition of probable cause is but an officer would usually write an affidavit to be submitted to the judge. The judge has to ascertain accurately suspicious actions as opposed to just reciting the officer’s beliefs to the reliability of the information (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015). In the affidavit it has to establish further that a hint of criminal activity is stirring. Officers do not need to have beyond a reasonable doubt. All the judge needs is the information provided and that information demonstrates consistency of the evidence “reliability of the information” (Illinois v. Gates, U.S. Sup. Ct. 1983). The judge will consider information in an affidavit as be reliable based on stipulations if it comes from confidential informants with a reliable past with knowledge of illegal wrong doings. There is a such thing as a good faith search where a search took place before if the officer does have reasonable suspicion or probable cause your vehicle can and will be searched. When going to court the judge will back that officer if the officer had probable cause and proves you committed a crime or the search is proper without a warrant because of certain circumstances. As framed by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment comes into play only if the defendant has a “legitimate expectation of privacy” in the place or thing searched (Katz v. U.S., U.S. Sup. Ct. 1967). The Supreme Court uses a two-part test and if the answers for that test bot answer yes then the courts will determine if the search was within legal limits. If an officer is doing the right thing he will not conduct an improper search because the resulting evidence will be barred from trial. For example if I walked in a shoe store with a box, I put some shoes in my bag that I didn’t pay for, I walk out of the store and an officer spots me walking out the store, stops me and demands to look inside my bag. When he opens my bag up I have the stolen shoes in my bag the shoe manager identifies that they are stolen and I go to jail. The judge would throw the case out because the officer conducted an illegal search which would fall under the exclusionary rule where evidence that was obtained by police in an illegal search cannot be used as evidence in court.
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides in part that a person cannot “be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015). This clause is the foundation of rights afforded to criminal defendants in criminal court proceedings also known as due process of law meaning that there are fair and just standards that are supposed to be upheld in criminal courts. The defendant has the right to remain silent. A person doesn’t have to testify at their own trial because the constitution under the Fifth Amendment says the defendant cannot be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015). Double jeopardy is also a rule from the Fifth Amendment where it prohibits a defendant from being tried twice and put on the stand for the same defense. Under due process of law you have the ability as a defendant to contest the charges that have been brought upon you. That is by law you are supposed to be given allocated time before trial where a defendant is given long enough to prepare a defense. Substantive due process is another one of those governmental objectives where if they take actions they would have to prove fully that the punishment fits the crime. Running a stop sign under law holds a minimum of two years in prison and would be a violation of this law because it does not fit the crime. Dealing with this from a police officers point of view you might get some subjects on the streets or highways drinking and driving. An officer pulls over a subject rightfully and legally so they deny the officers request for a blood sample thinking it might incriminate them. Under law if a suspect is implicated in a DUI, the officer has a right to have you do a breath test to check your blood alcohol levels.
The Sixth Amendment gives you the right to have a lawyer present during questioning by a police officer. Upon arrest officers commonly interrogate or question the arrestee. Under this amendment you don’t have to speak while in custody unless you choose to talk to the police therefore giving up your right voluntarily by answering the police is totally up to the arrestee. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a trail by jury but this does not extent to petty offenses (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015). The U.S. Supreme Court has defined a petty offense as one that does not carry a sentence of more than six months in jail (Lewis v. U.S., U.S. Sup CT. 1996). Most felonies and misdemeanors carry possible maximum sentences of six months in jail or possibly more so most defendants are entitled to a trial by jury. The ability for your friends, family, or ordinary citizens in attendance of public trials in a criminal case is guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment. In court while going through some of the trial processes the defense is entitled to cross-examine all prosecution witnesses under the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment that gives the defendant that right (Douglas v. Alabama, U,S. sup. CT. 1965). Prosecution witnesses have to come to court, look the defendant in their face and subject themselves to questioning by the defense. There are also rights that prevent secret trials and forbid prosecution to use some type of oral or written statements from witnesses like DNA, forensic typing, and blood alcohol content testimonial is non admissible (Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, U.S. Sup. Ct. 2009). If this type of evidence happens to be introduced as some type of evidence the prosecutor normally would have to call those people up as witnesses where the defense under the Sixth Amendment can cross examine them (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2015). An example of right to remain silent is if Mark gets arrested for assault at the police station the arresting officer wants to know about the events that lead up to the assault, Mark does not have to answer the officer’s questions. For a police officer to make a strong case against a subject you want to make sure the arrestee is asked the right questions that help you in your case but making sure that the Miranda Rights are read are important especially if the case goes off to trial. Everything you say can and will be help against you so an officer not reading Miranda warnings would make everything the suspect said non admissible and would be excluded in a trial.

References

Fifth Amendment. (2015). In Encyclopaedia Britannica http://academic.eb.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/EBchecked/topic/206470/Fifth-Amendment

Fourth Amendment. (2015). In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://academic.eb.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/EBchecked/topic/215219/Fourth-Amendment
"Fruit of the Poisonous Tree." Gale Encyclopedia of American Law. Ed. Donna Batten. 3rd ed. Vol. 5. Detroit: Gale, 2010. 10-14. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 1 Apr. 2015

Sixth Amendment. (2015). In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://academic.eb.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/EBchecked/topic/547123/Sixth-Amendment