6 Significant Rulings from the      US Supreme Court     Civics Unit 3 Connection1          Joe Berendsohn        Supreme ...
Case 1 - Miranda v Arizona 1966•   Ernesto Miranda was a 23 year old indigent in Phoenix, Arizona. He was arrested at his ...
Case 2 – Brown v Board of Ed 1954•    Five cases were consolidated to be presented to the Supreme Court concerning segrega...
Case 3 – Marbury v Madison 1803•   President John Adams named new justices of the Peace and New circuit court judges on th...
Case 4 – Reed v Reed 1971•   Sally and Cecil Reed were married and had an adopted son.•   They lived in Idaho, and separat...
Case 5 – Gideon v Wainwright 1963•    Clarence Hall Gideon was arrested for stealing from vending machines in Panama City,...
Case 6 – Escobido v Illinois 1964•   Danny Escobido was arrested for the murder of his brother-in-law.•   There was no war...
Conclusion•   Case 1 - set the rule that suspects have to know their rights before being questioned by the police.•   Case...
Works Cited and Image Sources•   Supreme Court Seal on title slide blog.cleanenergy.org•   Case 1 http://www.infoplease.co...
Joe's Civics project
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Joe's Civics project

521 views

Published on

Published in: Education, News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
521
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Joe's Civics project

  1. 1. 6 Significant Rulings from the US Supreme Court Civics Unit 3 Connection1 Joe Berendsohn Supreme Court IA2P
  2. 2. Case 1 - Miranda v Arizona 1966• Ernesto Miranda was a 23 year old indigent in Phoenix, Arizona. He was arrested at his home for rape and kidnapping• The policemen did not inform Miranda of his rights and had him sign a confession that included a paragraph that waived his rights to counsel.• It was shown that the police violated his 5th Amendment right (to remain silent), and his 6th Amendment right (to legal counsel).• Miranda did have an attorney for the trial, but was convicted.• The Supreme Court overturned his conviction, and this case was the first in a group of cases that were decided together.• The law changed to require the police to clearly define the rights that a person has before they are asked any questions by the police.• Ernesto was retried and found guilty at his new trial.• The overall impact is the well know process of “Mirandizing” individuals by police officers everywhere in the United States.• The creation of the Miranda Warning put on the shoulders of the police the burden of informing citizens subject to questioning in a criminal investigation of their rights to “due process.” quote fromMiranda v. Arizona (1966) http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme- court/cases/ar23.html#ixzz1eUyTcYVo
  3. 3. Case 2 – Brown v Board of Ed 1954• Five cases were consolidated to be presented to the Supreme Court concerning segregation of children in school by race, and identified as Brown v Bd of Education• Linda Brown was a black third grader in Topeka, KS. She had to walk a mile to school even though a “white” school was just 7 blocks away.• The NAACP recognized that her case was the one that they could use to highlight the situation.• The previous rule of "separate but equal" was determined to not apply to public education.• The overall impact is that children of all races were allowed to be in the school that was closest to them.• “It was a giant step towards complete desegregation of public schools. Even partial desegregation of these schools, however, was still very far away, as would soon become apparent.” quote from http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/early-civilrights/brown.html
  4. 4. Case 3 – Marbury v Madison 1803• President John Adams named new justices of the Peace and New circuit court judges on the last day of his presidency under the Organic Act.• The signatures were not delivered until Thomas Jefferson became president, and he refused to accept the commissions as valid.• President Jefferson would not let the Secretary of State, James Madison, deliver the commission to Marbury that allowed him to perform his job.• William Marbury had been named by Adams as a justice of the peace, and appealed directly to the Supreme Court.• The court determined that Marbury’s rights had been violated, but the court did not have the jurisdiction to make the Secretary of State deliver the commission to him.• This decision helped further define the division of responsibilities of the arms of government.• See Ex Parte McCardle for a constitutional law case brief holding that that the Constitution gives Congress the express power to make exceptions to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. quote from http://www.lawnix.com/cases/marbury-madison.html
  5. 5. Case 4 – Reed v Reed 1971• Sally and Cecil Reed were married and had an adopted son.• They lived in Idaho, and separated. The mother had custody until the boy’s teen years.• Their 19 year old son committed suicide, and died with no will.• Sally Reed was not allowed to be the executor of the boy’s estate because of Idaho law that said that men had preference for the responsibility.• The Supreme Court said that state laws cannot discriminate based on the sex of the person.• Reed v. Reed was the first ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that concluded laws arbitrarily requiring gender (based on the sex of the person) discrimination were violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment quote from http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/reed-v-reed
  6. 6. Case 5 – Gideon v Wainwright 1963• Clarence Hall Gideon was arrested for stealing from vending machines in Panama City, FL.• Clarence requested that he have a court appointed attorney because he could not afford one.• The judge said that they only provided attorneys to poor defendants who were facing the death penalty.• Clarence was found guilty as he defended himself, and sentenced to 5 years in prison.• Clarence appealed to the Supreme Court saying that his conviction was unconstitutional because he did not have representation at his trial.• The Supreme Court ruled in Clarence Gideon’s favor.• He was retried with an attorney to represent him and was acquitted of the charges.• In Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution requires the states to provide defense attorneys to criminal defendants charged with serious offenses who cannot afford lawyers themselves. Quote from http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_gideon.html
  7. 7. Case 6 – Escobido v Illinois 1964• Danny Escobido was arrested for the murder of his brother-in-law.• There was no warrant for Danny’s arrest and he was denied access to his attorney.• The Chicago police kept questioning Danny for many hours, even though he kept asking for his lawyer.• Danny Escobido confessed during questioning, and was convicted of murder.• The Supreme Court decided in Escobido’s favor, and the decision was later clarified by the Miranda v Arizona case in 1966.• Danny Escobido was freed, and then went on to be on the FBI’s most wanted list for another murder, but he fled to Mexico. http://www.scribd.com/doc/6608604/APUS-Court-Cases-Escobedo-v-Illinois• The decision was widely criticized by police officers who depended on confessions for evidence. It also raised many questions: it seemed to imply that suspects should be-told of their right to remain silent and to have an attorney. quote from http://forquignon.com/history/government/supreme_court/escobedo.htm
  8. 8. Conclusion• Case 1 - set the rule that suspects have to know their rights before being questioned by the police.• Case 2 – ruled that children of all races are allowed to go the public schools without segregation.• Case 3 - kept the parts of government separate so that the Supreme Court could not dictate actions to the other branches• Case 4 – said that a state cannot discriminate based on sex• Case 5 - said that people on trial have the right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one• Case 6 – people who ask for their attorney before being questioned cannot be questioned without the attorney – led up to case 1 – Miranda rights.
  9. 9. Works Cited and Image Sources• Supreme Court Seal on title slide blog.cleanenergy.org• Case 1 http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme-court/cases/ar23.html#ixzz1eJHMGDUQ• Photo for Ernesto Miranda from http://doney.net• Case 2 http://www.nationalcenter.org/brown.html and http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/early-civilrights/brown.html• Photo from http://www.nps.gov/brvb• Case 3 http://www.lawnix.com/cases/marbury-madison.html• Photo of Madison http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com• Case 4 http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/reed-v-reed• Photo iams.pbworks.com• Case 5 http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_155/• Photo acslaw.org• Case 6 http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0378_0478_ZS.html• Photo turnerlawoffices.com• US Flag on Conclusion slide ushistory.org

×