Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
n this case, after agreeing to hear the
case (known as granting certiorari) the United States Supreme Court held
that detectives interrogating Thompkins did not violate Thompkins’
Miranda rights in obtaining his confession.
Read the case of Berghuis v. Thompkins. You may also find it helpful to listen to the oral arguments the lawyers made before the United States Supreme Court.
Prepare an argument for:
You must argue against
the majority’s decision and in favor of the dissent. The dissent argued
that Thompkins’ confession was illegally obtained in violation of his
Miranda rights.
Remember to support your required
position with what you have learned from this week’s assigned reading
about constitutional safeguards
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.