This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Why are the Fourth and Fifth Amendments not applicable in the identification context? What will ... (Read 42 times)

vicky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
Why are the Fourth and Fifth Amendments not applicable in the identification context?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

How does the exclusionary rule operate in the context of confessions and interrogations?
 
  What will be an ideal response?



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

Jordin Calloway

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
Answer to Question 1

The due process clause does not require a preliminary judicial inquiry into the reliability of an eyewitness identification when the identification was not procured under unnecessarily suggestive circumstances arranged by law enforcement.

The Fifth Amendment's self-incrimination clause has also been invoked with regard to identification procedures. In particular, some defendants have argued that being forced to participate in a lineup or photographic array is itself incriminating and, as such, violates the Fifth Amendment. However, in United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967), the Court held that the privilege against self-incrimination does not limit the use of identification procedures. The Court's rationale was that even though incriminating information can result from identification procedures, such evidence is physical or real as opposed to testimonial.

Answer to Question 2

Generally speaking, a confession obtained in violation of Miranda or some constitutional provision will be excluded. However, just because a confession is obtained illegally does not mean that any subsequently obtained evidence will automatically be excluded. In fact, illegally obtained statements are themselves considered admissible in certain instances. There are essentially three lines of cases involving confessions and the exclusionary rule: (1) cases involving the standing of a party to challenge a confession, (2) cases where the prosecution seek to use a confession for impeachment, and (3) cases where a defendant seeks to exclude evidence that is fruit of the poisonous tree.




vicky

  • Member
  • Posts: 586
Reply 2 on: Aug 17, 2018
YES! Correct, THANKS for helping me on my review


Bigfoot1984

  • Member
  • Posts: 321
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it

 

Did you know?

One way to reduce acid reflux is to lose two or three pounds. Most people lose weight in the belly area first when they increase exercise, meaning that heartburn can be reduced quickly by this method.

Did you know?

There are over 65,000 known species of protozoa. About 10,000 species are parasitic.

Did you know?

According to the Migraine Research Foundation, migraines are the third most prevalent illness in the world. Women are most affected (18%), followed by children of both sexes (10%), and men (6%).

Did you know?

Certain rare plants containing cyanide include apricot pits and a type of potato called cassava. Fortunately, only chronic or massive ingestion of any of these plants can lead to serious poisoning.

Did you know?

An identified risk factor for osteoporosis is the intake of excessive amounts of vitamin A. Dietary intake of approximately double the recommended daily amount of vitamin A, by women, has been shown to reduce bone mineral density and increase the chances for hip fractures compared with women who consumed the recommended daily amount (or less) of vitamin A.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library