Okay,
Let say you get arrested for a crime. You go to court for your first appearance. That is when your 6th Amendment kicks in.
The 6th reads:
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 for his defense.
If the officer then approaches you for this crime that you have now had your first appearance on then he could possibly have violated your 6th Amendment. Basically, it boils down to confronting you about the crime after you have been advised of your right to counsel by the court.
There are ways around it such as having you wave your 6th Amendment Rights.
Yes, the Police can violate the 6th. Look up Brewer v. Williams. That is one example.
2007-06-06 12:53:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by El Scott 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Amendment VI
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 for his defense.
So, after after reading that, I would say it is hard for the police to violate it. It is more for the courts and appellate procedure.
Speedy trial, a right to a jury... that's all courts.
I guess the only thing is refusal to allow the "Defendant" to have access to counsel / attorney.
2007-06-06 12:54:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dog Lover 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't think it's possible for a cop to violate your 6th Amendment rights, as it has mostly to do with your trial. A judge or DA maybe, but not the cop.
2007-06-06 12:57:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Uncle Pennybags 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well. It so happens I know this one pretty well.
Any cop that say shoots a person in the head rather than allowing him a trial of any kind has violated the 6th Amendment. I know that one personally; it actually happened to me. I was framed for a crime (a badly done transparent kind of frame easily found out by any investigation - but the framer was a mobster who claimed relation to a Senator - so anyway, the cop covered up - and I have reason to believe either was involuntarily doped by a fellow cop or believing me to have covered up culpability by date rape drugs in fact did it to himself "tit for presumed tat"). Now the "evidence" will not be corroborated by the hospital in who's parking lot I was shot, and left for dead for several hours as they can be sued as well if they admit to anything.
2007-06-06 13:00:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
It would not sound like your rights have been violated. They asked a query you chosen to answer. Being a minor you may have informed them i want a make sure cutting-edge. Miranda is basically examine for the period of arrest (which you weren't being arrested) As for the warrant in case you flow in with a make sure and a lawyer it is going to likely be dealt with ... warrant is issued must you fail to look. stable success with the case.
2016-11-26 20:49:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They can't.
The right to a speedy trial is handled by the D.A., the Courts, and the defense. Waivers are the norm and are perfectly legal.
Btw, since I'm doing your homework for you, a public trial as defined by the 6th amendment is not absolute.
2007-06-06 12:58:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by chuck_junior 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
if s/he does anything in contradiction of this text:
"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 for his defense."
2007-06-06 12:53:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by Kevy 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I fought the law and the, law won.
2007-06-06 12:47:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
only if he put your life in danger you have right to councel
2007-06-06 12:50:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by govtagent_2001 4
·
0⤊
2⤋