Four of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights protect people suspected or accused of crimes. In the 1960s the Court applied most of these protections to the states through incorporation. Follow a case from start to finish.
| Stage | Amendment | Landmark case |
|---|---|---|
| Search | Fourth: no unreasonable searches; warrants need probable cause | Mapp v. Ohio (1961), 6–3: evidence from an unconstitutional search must be excluded in state courts too (the exclusionary rule) |
| Questioning | Fifth: no one "compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself" | Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 5–4: people in custody must be warned before interrogation |
| Trial | Sixth: a speedy, public jury trial and "the Assistance of Counsel" | Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), 9–0: states must provide a lawyer to poor defendants charged with felonies |
| Sentence | Eighth: no excessive bail or fines, no cruel and unusual punishments | Timbs v. Indiana (2019): the ban on excessive fines binds the states |
Why it works
Why protect suspects? Because the government is powerful and the accused may be innocent. The rules aim to keep convictions reliable and to deter abuses. Critics of the exclusionary rule say it can free guilty people because of an officer's error; the Court has since made exceptions, such as for officers who relied in good faith on a warrant later found invalid (United States v. Leon, 1984). Miranda was also debated for decades; in Dickerson v. United States (2000) the Court held it is a constitutional rule that Congress cannot override by statute.
- You have the right to remain silent.
- Anything you say can be used against you in court.
- You have the right to a lawyer, before and during questioning.
- If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you.
Key idea
Mapp (1961) applied the exclusionary rule to the states; Gideon (1963) guaranteed a lawyer for poor defendants facing felony charges; Miranda (1966) requires warnings before custodial interrogation.
Worked example: Is a warning needed?
An officer arrests a man and drives him to the station without asking any questions. Must she read the Miranda warnings during the drive?
- Miranda applies to custodial interrogation: being in custody and being questioned.
- He is in custody, but no one is questioning him.
Answer: No; the warnings are needed before questioning, not at every arrest.
Worked example: Which case?
Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida with a felony and could not afford a lawyer. The judge refused to appoint one. What did the Supreme Court hold?
- The Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to the states through the Fourteenth.
- The vote was unanimous; it overruled Betts v. Brady (1942).
Answer: States must provide lawyers to defendants charged with felonies who cannot afford one.
Common mistake
Thinking police must read Miranda warnings at every arrest, or that a missing warning ends the case. The warnings are required before custodial interrogation; without them, the statements generally cannot be used in the prosecution's main case, but other evidence can still be used.