Asked by Tom

The Escobedo and Miranda Laws are landmark court decisions that impact the manner in which law enforcement int
Question Details: What is the relationship between the two?

What was the impact of both decisions in terms of interviews and interrogations of a suspect?

What statute did Congress pass two years after the Miranda ruling?

How did the statute change or affect the Miranda ruling?

Do these laws protect individual rights or do they simply provide a loophole for criminals.
Answered by Tom
Could someone critic this for me?

Escobedo v. Illinois came first when he filed a case against the State of Illinois because they did not allow him access to an attorney after having been arrested previously on the same charge of murdering his brother-in-law. In the Miranda case, they set the new precedent of the Miranda warning the way we know it today just to make the issue an airtight warning that all persons arrested are entitled to invoke their right to an attorney. They could not go back and have a do over with Escobedo because issue had not been determined to the Miranda extent. Now they gave themselves an out with the Miranda case.
Answered by Writeacher
Miranda:
http://www.google.com/search?q=miranda+ruling&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA

Escobedo:
http://www.google.com/search?q=escobedo+ruling&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7SUNA

Please repost when you have written your assignment. Someone here will be happy to comment on your thoughts.
Answered by Ms. Sue
These articles will give you a good start on your research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escobedo_v._Illinois

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning
Answered by Writeacher
Who is he? Full name.

Who are "they" all through this?
Answered by Tom
Escobedo actually asked for an attorney and was refused. His confession was thrown out.

Miranda ruling was that all suspects must be given their rights in a form that they can understand.

Two years later Congress tried to weaken Miranda in Federal cases.

They protect the innocent and the guilty. No one should talk to the police without a lawyer present because their words will be twisted by the police.
Answered by Writeacher
Focus on the details here.

1. Who refused to get an attorney for Escobedo? Who threw out the confession?

2. Can you really "give" someone his rights? Or do you mean that "suspects must be told what their rights are..."

3. What did Congress do in attempting to weaken the Miranda process?

4. Who are "they"? Who are "their"?

Be specific.
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_pronuse.html

Use active voice verbs rather than passive.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/passive.htm
Answered by courtney
just to let you know the escobedo v. illinios case "The Supreme Court overturned Escobedo's conviction and recognized a suspect's right to an attorney during police interrogation." and it wasn't so much about the marianda rights it was more about the due process rights
Answered by ayfzp miokyd
nxgzvc blxrego gdncxktf hecr emudn szvdoubc vrkj
There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!