Using the following outline Write a review of the following

Using the following outline. Write a review of the following case: Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. 778 (2009) CAPSULE: a review of the findings of the Court including the constitutional issue; explains the type of case that will be briefed; a shorter version of the HOLDING FACTS: a presentation of the circumstances of the event that led to the court case; explains the key facts of the case (who, what, when where, how, and why) ISSUE: a presentation of the particular legal (constitutional) issue at hand; will always been in a question format with a YES or NO response HOLDING or SUPREME COURT DECISION: statement(s) that affirm the constitutional issue with the court’s decision implied; the most important part of a court decision REASON: usually the longest part of the case brief; includes the logic behind the Court’s stance on the issue at hand; can include direct wording from the Court’s written decision CASE SIGNIFICANCE: an explanation of the consequences of the ruling and how procedures will change

Solution

Montejo v. Louisiana Case Review

A review of Montejo v. Louisiana
Citation: 556 U.S. 778 (2009)

CAPSULE:

Montejo was charged with the first degree of murder and arrested. He was held guilty primarily by his own letter sent to the widow of the deceased apologizing for the crime. He created the incriminating document when he was being taken by the police to help find the murder weapon at the location. His rights to request for a counsel were not invoked by him before writing the letter. As per the Fifth Amendment, he could evoke his right to counsel and as per sixth amendment he could refuse to answer any question in adversarial proceedings.

FACTS: The petitioner Montejo was arrested and charged with first-degree murder in Louisiana. The judge ordered the court to assign a counsel for him. Two days later 2 police officers visited him and read out his Miranda rights before counsel was appointed and requested to accompany them to find the murder weapon. During this period he wrote a letter to the widow of deceased apologizing for the crime. This letter was presented as evidence against despite objections of the defending counsel the evidence was allowed. He was convicted and sentenced to death. His conviction was affirmed by the supreme court of Louisiana.

Issue: Is the right to counsel as per Fifth Amendment and the norms of the sixth amendment adhered?

HOLDING or SUPREME COURT DECISION:

Justice Scalia delivered the verdict as follows:

The defense relied heavily on Michigan v. Jackson (475 U.S. 625 [1986], but at no point, the defendant had evoked his right to counsel by as per the fifth and sixth amendment. Secondly, the case taken as precedent was too recent and should not be used to protect the crime.

The right to questioning by police was allowed as long as defendant evoked his right to counsel. The rules were made to avoid badgering of the defendant by the police.

The laws should not be used to cover up crime and should be used for getting a greater clarity on the case.

He clearly stated we cannot use traditional methods and let the case go unsolved.

He was still allowed to seek justice and review under Edwards v. Arizona (451 U.S. 477 [1981)

REASON:

Justice Scalia followed by Supreme Court judges have passed a death sentence as the defendant before evoking right to counsel has creating incriminating evidence. He has been highlighted is his rights by the policeman according to the fifth and sixth counsel but he has not evoked the.

He has agreed to the crime hence the death sentence which is fair judgment despite all precedents.

CASE SIGNIFICANCE:

All judges ruled with the minor difference of opinion that justice is the end result. We cannot use judgments in our favor quoting precedents but at all points, the fifth and sixth amendment will hold the defendants right to counsel