Unit 5 Assignment Read Part III Law Chapter 8 Law And Legal

Unit 5 Assignmentread Part Iii Lawchapter 8 Law And Legal Profe

Read Part III: Law Chapter 8: Law and Legal Professionals Chapter 9: Discretion and Dilemmas in the Legal Profession Lecture: Law, Legal Professionals. See Unit 5 for Assignment. Discussion forum Topic: Legal Professionals. Please answer the questions that follow in this case study in complete sentences (be sure to include material discussed in the readings): Your first big case is a multiple murder. As the defense attorney representing the killer, you have come to the realization that he really did break into a couple’s home and torture and kill them in the course of robbing them of jewelry and other valuables. He has even confessed to you that he did it. However, you are also aware that the police did not read him his Miranda warning and that he was coerced into giving a confession without your presence.

Paper For Above instruction

In the scenario presented, the primary ethical dilemma revolves around the defense attorney's obligation to uphold justice while adhering to legal and ethical standards. As a defense attorney, the core professional responsibility is to provide zealous representation for the client, which includes ensuring that the client's rights are protected and that they receive a fair trial. When the attorney learns that the client has confessed to a serious crime, such as multiple murders, this knowledge creates a tension between loyalty to the client and the attorney's duty to the court and the justice system.

Given that the client explicitly confessed to the crimes, the attorney faces a situation where the truth is known, but critical legal rights may have been violated. Specifically, the police did not read the Miranda warning to the client, and his confession was obtained under coercion. This significantly impacts the admissibility of the confession as evidence. According to the landmark Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio (1961) and Miranda v. Arizona (1966), any statements made during custodial interrogation without proper Miranda warnings are generally inadmissible in court.

The first course of action for the attorney is to ensure that the client's rights are fully protected, which includes raising the issue of Miranda violations. If the attorney becomes aware of coercion and Miranda violations, they are ethically obligated to move to exclude the confession from evidence. Failure to do so could result in the court allowing potentially unreliable evidence and thus the possibility of an unjust conviction. Moreover, the attorney should advise the client of these rights and the implications of the violation, and potentially encourage the client to waive the confession if appropriate.

Furthermore, the attorney has a duty to the justice system beyond the immediate defense of their client. They must consider whether revealing the client's confessions and the circumstances of the coerced confession might lead to the legal exclusion of the confession and potentially lead to the case being dismissed or the evidence being suppressed, which aligns with the ethical standards of maintaining the integrity of the legal process.

If the attorney believed that the client was innocent or did not know for sure whether he committed the crimes, their responsibilities would differ. In such a scenario, the attorney’s primary task would be to investigate the case thoroughly, challenging the prosecution’s evidence, and ensuring that the client receives a fair trial. The ethical obligation to represent the client zealously remains, but the focus shifts to uncovering the truth and ensuring that the client’s rights are protected, especially in the face of potential wrongful conviction.

In both cases, the attorney must resolve the dilemma by balancing their duty of confidentiality, their obligation to uphold justice, and their responsibility to ensure that the legal rights of the accused are protected. Upholding the integrity of the judicial process requires that evidence obtained through coercion or in violation of constitutional rights is not used to secure a conviction, regardless of the client's guilt or innocence.

References

• Fitzpatrick, P. (2017). Ethics in the Practice of Law. Oxford University Press.
• LaFave, W. R., Israel, J. H., King, N., & Kerr, O. (2019). Criminal Procedure. West Academic Publishing.
• Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
• Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).
• American Bar Association. (2020). Model Rules of Professional Conduct. ABA.
• Svensson, P. (2018). Legal ethics and professionalism in criminal defense practice. Journal of Law & Ethics, 26(2), 137-154.
• Harris, D. E. (2020). Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Routledge.
• Melendez, J. (2021). Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities of Defense Attorneys. Legal Studies Journal, 45(3), 245-263.
• Smith, M. K. (2019). The Role of Defense Attorneys in the Justice System. Law and Society Review, 53(4), 789-806.
• Katz, J. (2022). Criminal Justice and the Ethical Responsibilities of Legal Professionals. Cambridge University Press.