Mitchell vs US
Published on Nov 22, 2015
No Description
MORE DECKS TO EXPLORE
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
When And Where?
- US Supreme Court
- Argued December 9, 1998
- Decided April 5, 1999
ISSUE/cONFLICT
- If you are protected from self incrimination when plead guilty
- Said yes in the Court of Appeals
- Went to Supreme Court where it was decided no it is not
- Based on grounds that you hand over personal rights after pleading guilty
- So then, self incrimination is nullified, no holds barred
PLAINTIFF/BEST ARGUMENTS
- United States of America
- When you plead guilty you turn over personal rights
- This includes the right to protection against self incrimination
- Working to get her more than just a 1 year distributing charge
- She had tried to distribute 5 kilos of cocaine, 5 kilos Ina's a certain number of prison year's tied to it in the state where she was at the time
DEFENDANT/BEST ARGUMENTS
- Amanda Mitchell
- Argued she had her right to remain silent
- Also that she was protected from self incrimination
- That the Fifth Amendment gave the Court those guidelines
PROVISION AT ISSUE
- The Fifth Amendment freedom from self incrimination
IMPACT/lANDMARK
- Lasting impact was the reacknowledgment of pleading guilty
- If you plead guilty you hand over certain rights
- This is what makes this a landmark case in history, plead guilty, lose rights
- Specifically right from self incrimination
DECISION/rEASONING
- Mitchell would receive additional charge of 10 years
- Her failure to object to the witness's claims secured her 10 years
- She plead guilty, therefore incriminating herself is now legally usable
DISSENTS
- Scalia and Thomas
- See Notability
MOVEMENT THROUGH COURTS
- US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals
- Supreme Court
QUESTIONS
- Do you agree with the Court's decision?
- What if the 5 kilo ruling was non existent, though she still committed the crime?
- What could she say if they accused her of no 5th Amendment protection if she
- had not plead guilty^
