Blog
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
50 Founders Plaza
East Hartford, CT 06108
Defendants in criminal cases often struggle to protect their rights, especially when police officers or other law enforcement officials use threats, lies, and coercion to extract confessions. While most people are aware of their “Miranda rights,” which include the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions or provide information requested by police officers, as well as the right to be represented by an attorney, many people are convinced to waive these rights during an investigation or interrogation. A recent case in New Jersey illustrates how this issue may be handled in certain situations and how those who are accused of committing crimes can protect their rights.
In the case of State v. Gonzalez, a woman who had worked as a nanny was accused of assaulting a child that was in her care and causing broken bones and other injuries. Prior to being interrogated by police officers, she had signed a waiver of her Miranda rights. During the interrogation, an officer lied to her and claimed that there was video surveillance of her interactions with the child. This led her to confess to abusing the child, and the officer also convinced her to write an apology note to the child’s parents.
In recent years, many people have become aware of the opioid crisis that is affecting people throughout the United States. Due to the widespread availability of prescription opioid painkillers, many people have become addicted to these drugs, leading them to turn to illegal sources. To make matters worse, fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, has become more available, and this drug has led to many overdoses. In addition to risks that may affect a person’s health and well-being, those who use fentanyl or other substances may face drug charges that could lead to serious criminal consequences.
Fentanyl is a drug that is synthesized in laboratories, and unlike drugs such as heroin, it can be created using chemicals rather than being harvested from natural sources. Because it is much easier to create and distribute, it is highly profitable for drug trafficking rings. Unfortunately, it is also much more dangerous, and it can be 50 times as potent as heroin.
Dishonesty is an issue that affects nearly every part of people’s lives. People lie for many reasons, and these lies can affect others in a variety of ways. However, there are some people that are expected to behave honestly, including police officers and other officials who are tasked with upholding the law. Unfortunately, law enforcement officials are as prone to dishonesty as everyone, and when they lie or bend the truth, this can have serious consequences for those who are involved in criminal cases. By understanding why police officers lie and the rights that apply to those who are arrested or charged with crimes, a person can protect themselves as they defend against criminal charges.
Deception can take multiple forms. Some lies involve complete deception in which a story is entirely fabricated and contains no truth. However, many lies are incomplete, and they may involve half-truths, exaggerations of facts, or the omission of pertinent information. Police officers may engage in all of these types of lies during the investigation or prosecution of an alleged crime. In fact, officers generally have no requirement to be truthful when questioning or interrogating suspects, and they may engage in dishonesty such as:
Drug addiction can be a difficult burden to bear, and it can affect both an addict and their loved ones. Unfortunately, many addicts become caught up in the criminal justice system, and they may face drug charges for possession of controlled substances, possession with intent to distribute, or drug trafficking. In addition to or instead of facing criminal charges, some addicts may be forced to undergo treatment meant to help them overcome their addictions. However, some advocates have questioned the effectiveness of these forms of treatment and raised concerns about how “involuntary commitment” laws may violate people’s rights.
Multiple states have laws that allow a person to be forced to complete rehabilitation or other forms of addiction treatment. This is sometimes seen as a compassionate solution that will ensure that those who may be a threat to themselves or others can take steps to address issues related to addiction and get their lives back on track. Many family members support these programs, and they may believe that they are the only option for a person who has refused to accept help.
Minors who are charged with crimes and involved in juvenile delinquency proceedings or criminal cases in adult courts may face multiple types of consequences. In addition to criminal penalties, such as being placed in juvenile detention, paying fines or restitution, performing community service, and serving a sentence of probation, a person may face a number of other consequences. A criminal record can limit a person’s future job prospects, their ability to pursue an education or find housing, and multiple other areas of their life. Unfortunately, the mistakes made by a young person could follow them for the rest of their life.
Criminal justice advocates believe that juvenile offenders deserve the chance to put criminal offenses behind them as they move forward into adulthood. Multiple scientific studies have shown that when people are in their teens and early twenties, their brains are still developing, and they may not fully be able to understand the consequences of their actions or have the ability to control impulses. Because of this, minors who are charged or convicted of crimes will be likely to outgrow this behavior and avoid criminal activity in the future. However, a criminal record can make it difficult to do so. To address this issue, advocates are calling for changes to laws to ensure that juvenile criminal records can be expunged or kept confidential.
When a person is accused of a crime, the evidence against them should be properly evaluated during an investigation by law enforcement officials. When this evidence is presented during a criminal trial, jurors should be informed about the potential for errors and the possibility that investigators came to the wrong conclusions. Unfortunately, forensic evidence is often seen as infallible, and prosecutors may claim that certain types of evidence provide incontrovertible proof of a person’s guilt. In reality, many of these forms of evidence are based on “junk science,” and the misuse or misapplication of forensic evidence can lead to wrongful convictions.
There are some forms of evidence that can be scientifically evaluated to indicate whether a person did or did not commit a crime. For example, DNA evidence can often be used to identify a person, and prosecutors may argue that the presence of a person’s DNA at a crime scene demonstrates that they are guilty. However, there are multiple other types of forensic evidence that have been called into question, including:
Those who are involved in criminal cases will often struggle to protect their rights, including when they are placed under supervised release. There are many cases where those who are convicted of crimes may receive an early release through parole, or they may be sentenced to special parole in addition to serving a prison sentence. In other cases, a person may be sentenced to probation or other forms of conditional release. Those who are on parole or probation are subject to multiple types of restrictions, and they can face additional prison sentences or penalties for a probation or parole violation. This is a serious concern for many people, and a recent study has found that criminal violations of parole or probation account for around two thirds of all prison time sentenced by state and federal courts.
People in the 21st century usually expect that images of their faces will be captured on a regular basis, such as by security cameras at stores they visit. However, they may not be aware that these images could potentially be used against them in cases where police officers investigate alleged crimes, identify possible suspects, and decide to perform arrests and pursue criminal charges. As the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement continues to increase, many criminal defense lawyers, privacy advocates, and others who are concerned about criminal justice have raised concerns about how defendants may be affected by these practices.
According to a study performed by the Georgetown Center on Privacy and Technology in 2016, around half of all adults in the United States are included in facial recognition databases, and police in most states have access to this information. These databases include driver’s license photos and mug shots of people who have been arrested, and some facial recognition services have also compiled information from publicly available photos people have shared online, such as on Facebook or Instagram.
People who are charged with crimes can face a number of difficulties as they navigate the criminal justice system, and unfortunately, many defendants are treated unfairly by law enforcement officials and prosecutors. There are multiple ways that these officials can abuse the system, including by filing criminal charges against a person in retaliation for asserting their rights or to justify illegal actions by police officers. This is known as “malicious prosecution,” and it can often place people in a difficult position as they fight against what can seem like a rigged system. Fortunately, a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court may help limit these types of actions and ensure that defendants can protect their rights.
For years, courts have been divided on the issue of whether the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects people against criminal consequences, such as arrest or imprisonment, that are based on false statements or omitted facts by police officers or prosecutors. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court determined that people who have been subject to malicious prosecution can pursue civil lawsuits against those who were responsible in cases where charges are dropped or when they are acquitted.
Nearly everyone agrees that sex crimes are a serious issue that should be addressed by the criminal justice system. Sexual offenses committed against children can be especially horrific, and around one out of every four girls and one out of every 13 boys experience some form of sexual abuse while they are under the age of 18. However, people may disagree about the best ways to address these issues and protect children against harm. A recent study indicates that the resources the United States puts toward addressing child sexual offenses are more focused on punishing offenders than actually preventing these types of crimes from occurring.
The criminal justice system spends a significant amount of money to address child sex offenses, but nearly all of these funds go toward “reactive” efforts that take place after crimes have already been committed. There are currently more than 144,000 people incarcerated in state or federal prisons who have been convicted of sex crimes against children. Most of these offenders are required to serve sentences of at least eight years, and they are also subject to restrictions after being released, such as the requirement to register as sex offenders.
50 Founders Plaza
