It provides that individuals should not be forced to contribute to their own prosecution. This privilege extends from the moment of custody. The protection also means that judges, prosecutors, and juries cannot use the refusal of people to answer questions at their own trial as evidence of guilt. So, a defendant need not testify at trial, and chat right is absolute. However, under certain circumstances, sclf-incriinination may come fn>m sources other than the defendant’s testunony. For example, a court may force a defendant to provide a blood sample，appear before witnesses for identification, give fingerprints, repeat certain words or gestures, and give a voice sample. If the defendant does tesdfy, she or he may be questioned by the prosecutor about previous statements that contradict the testimony. Thus, freedom from self-incrimination does not apply if the defendant has made statements contrary to testimony given by witnesses.

Furthermore, a criminal defendant has the right to an attorney from the first critical stage of the criminal process to the end. This means that an attorney must be present at the request of the defendant during investigation, preliminary hearings, trial, and sentencing.

Under the Sixth Amendment, if a defendant is unable to afford an attorney, the court will appoint ain attorney. This right applies only for felony charges and cases in which actual imprisonment may be imposed. In the 1960s the Supreme Court rulings greatly strengthened the defendant’s right to counsel. Equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment requires that free legal counsel be appointed for all indigent defendants in all criminal cases.

Suspects are entitled to confer with counsel as soon as police investigation focuses on them. Before questioning suspects, a police officer must inform them of their consdtudonal ri^it to counsel and the right to remain silent. The police cannot question anyone who at any point asks for a lawyer or declines to be questioned. This also means that an indigent defendant not represented by counscl at trial cannot be sentenced to incarceration.

Double Jeopardy

The Fiith Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that no person shall “be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." This provision is known as the double jeopardy clause. Generally, this clause applies only to criminal cases and consists of three constitutional protections.

First, it protects a person from being prosecuted a second time for the same offense after being declared innocent. Second, it protects a person from a second prosecution for the same crime after conviction. Third, in addition to prohibiting more than one prosecution, the double jeopardy clause protects an individual from being punished more than once for the same crime.

There are, however, a number of exceptions. The Supreme Court held that the double jeopardy clause does not protect an individual from being tried a second time if jurors cannot reach a verdict in the first trial (a hung jury). Moreover, federal and state governments may separately try a person for the same offense if it violates both federal and state laws. Finally, a verdict of guilt or innocence in a criminal trial does not preclude a dvil trial in which plaindfis sue for damages inflicted by the accused.

Trial

Trial is by jury or before a judge alone if a jury is not required, or if the defendant consents. The government presents its case, through the public prosecutor, usually called the district attorney, w^iile the accused is represented by counsel that he or she has chosen or that the court has appointed. At trial, a criminal defendant has a number of constitutional rights, including the right to a speedy and public trial, the ri^it to a trial by jury for any criminal offense punishable by imprisonment for more than six months, the right to a fair and impardal trial, the ri^ht to confront prosecution witnesses, the right to compel favorable witnesses to appear, the ri^it to be represented by counsel and the privilege against self-incriminadon.

Today trial proceedings follow a rigidly structured format. First, attorneys make opening statements. The prosecution describes the crime and how it will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed it. The defense attorney argues either that the crime did not occur or that the defendant did not do it. Next, each side, again beginning with the prosecution, calls witnesses who first testily for their side’ then are cross -examined by the opposing attorney. After all the witnesses on both sides have been heard and cross-examined，prosecution and defense give their dosing arguments. In this adversarial system, the burden of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” rests with the prosecution; the defense does not need to prove that the accused is innocent.

The United States Consdtudon allows the accused to choose whether to be judged by judges or a jury. In a jury trial, the parties to a suit present their evidence to the jury. The judge then instructs the jury as to how the law applies to their findings of fact, and the jury then deliberates and renders its verdict in the matter. It is distinguished from a bench trial, in which a judge or panel of judges make all decisions. The Sixth Amendment of the Consdtudon guarantees an accused the ri^it to a jury triaJ in all criminal prosecutions. This right does not ply to trials for petty ofFenses, those for which the punishment may not exceed 6 months imprisonment.

In jury trials, juries must be impartial: they must not show bias or have a personal interest in the outcome. By tradition，juries have twelve members; however, states may provide as few as six, and the Supreme Court has allowed six-member juries in non-death-penalty cases. In federal court, juries should arrive at a unanimous decision. If a jury cannot do so, judges declare a “hung” jury and the prosecutor may schedule a retrial. In some states, a vote of nine out of twelve jurors is sufficient to convict or acquit. But if a jury of six is used, the verdict must be unanimous.

Plea Bargaining

In the United States, only a small number of criminal cases actually go to trial cach year. Typically, more than 75 percent of them end in guilty pleas. The vast majority of criminal eases are resolved by plea bargaining.

Plea bargaining is the process of negotiation between the parties in a criminal case. When it is successful, plea bargaining results in an agreement between the prosecutor and defendant. In this agreement the defendant agrees to plead guilty without a trial, and in return the prosecutor agrees to dismiss certain charges or make favorable sentence recommendations to the court. So, in plea bargaining, the defendant gives up the ri^it to trial by jury, the ri^it to confront and question one’s accusers, and the right to refuse to incriminate oneself.

Plea bargaining is expressly authorized in statutes and in court rules. It is lcgitiniate for prosecutors to use their power to persuade defendants to plead guilty. Moreover, prosecutors have discretion whether to offer a plea bargain. Generally, the judge will authorize a plea bargain if the defendant makes a voluntary waiver of his or her right to a trial, understands the charges, understands the maximum sentence he or she could rcccivc after pleading guilty, and makes a voluntary confession to the alleged crime. But even if a defendant agrees to plead guilty, a judge may decline to accept the guilty plea and plea agreement if the charges have no factual basis.

The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized plea bargaining as an important component of the American judicial system, for it can be advantageous for both prosecutors and defendants. Prosecutors may seek a plea bargain in certain cases to save the costs associated with the valuable court time and elaborate procedures a trial entails. They benefit also by eliminating the risk of an acquittal. Some plea bargains also obligate the defendant to provide information or other cooperation.

Criminal defendants may also benefit from plea bargaining. Pica agreements reduce the uncertainty associated with trial and provide quick relief from the anxiety of criminal prosecution because they shorten the prosecution process. Furthermore, plea agreements usually give defendants less punishment than they would rcccivc if they were found guilty of all charges after a full trial. The judge is likely to accept the prosecutor’s recommendation that a charge be dismissed or that the defendant rcccivc a limiter sentence.

Defendants are not required to accept a plea agreement offer. Some defendants choosc to decline a plea bargain if they believe that the risk of conviction is less than the possibility of acquittal. Other defendants may disregard the risks and mdee a choice to proceed to trial, either seeking to use trial proceedings as a forum for expressing themselves or merely wishing to exercise their constitutional rights. Prosecutors likewise arc not obliged to offer a plea bargain. A prosecutor may be reluctant to offer any deals to the defendant in deference to public sentiment. For example, a prosecutor may not offer a bargain to a person accused of rape and murder because such acts are widely considered to deserve the maximum reasonable punishment.