Understanding Your Constitutional Rights in Criminal, Juvenile, and Family Court
UNDERTANDING YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN THE CONTEXT OF CRIMINAL, JUVENILE, AND FAMILY COURT PROCEEDINGS
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The above Preamble to the United States Constitution outlines the general goals of its framers—(1) to create a just government and to ensure peace; (2) an adequate national defense and; (3) a healthy, free nation. With its first three words, “We the People,” the Preamble emphasizes that the Nation is to be ruled by the people. Our nation is not to be ruled by a King, dictator, president, Supreme Court Justices, members of Congress, state legislators, or the police.
While the Preamble to the Constitution is not a source of individual liberties and rights, it sets the framework for the proposition that the Constitution was enacted to protect the people—not the government. All of our rights and all of the government’s powers are set out in the articles and amendments of the United States Constitution. It is important to understand your Constitutional rights so you can recognize overreaching by the government when it occurs. To follow is an overview of important constitutional rights specifically in the context of termination of parental rights, family law, and criminal court proceedings.
Writ of Habeas Corpus, Bill of Attainder, and Ex Post Facto Laws
Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution specifically guarantees certain rights to people who have been accused of crimes. For instance, the privilege of a writ of habeas corpus—which allows prisoners to challenge his or her incarceration or imprisonment in court—cannot be suspended (except in very extreme circumstances where the public is in danger).
Article I, Section 9 also prohibits bills of attainder, which are laws that are directed against a specific person or groups of persons—making them automatically guilty of crimes without having to go through the court process. It is important to note that Congress does not have the authority to bypass the courts by denying criminal defendants the protections guaranteed by other parts of the Constitution.
Lastly, Article I, Section 9 prohibits ex post facto laws—which are criminal laws that make an action illegal after someone has already taken such action. It would simply not make sense if people could be convicted of crimes for past behavior that was not illegal at the time. The Constitution guarantees that individuals are warned ahead of time that their actions are illegal.
The Full Faith and Credit Clause
Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution provides that states must respect and honor the laws and court orders of other states—even if their own laws are different. This clause is especially relevant to family court proceedings. For example, if the citizens of Minnesota marry, divorce, or are awarded custody in Minnesota, Wisconsin must recognize those actions as being valid even if those actions would not have been possible under Wisconsin Law.
THE AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
The framers of the Constitution also realized that the nation—over time—may want to make certain changes to the Constitution. The Amendment process is included in Article V. There are currently 27 ratified amendments to the United States Constitution. Because many of our rights are provided in these amendments, it is important to understand them to better understand if they have been violated.
The Right to Bear Arms
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides the people with the right to bear arms. While there has been a debate surrounding the second amendment and whether the right to buy and use firearms and guns belongs to individuals or only the militia, the Constitution protects individuals from government action—so it would seem to make sense that the framers intended for this right to belong to the people. The United States Supreme Court has in fact accepted the viewpoint that Americans have the right to arm themselves for personal use in their home. However, courts have permitted the government to limit some rights of gun manufacturers, owners and sellers. Gun control legislation varies widely from state to state. If you feel as if your Second Amendment rights have been violated—contact the gun rights attorneys at RAM Law PLLC who will fight for this very important Constitutional right.
Protection Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure
An understanding of the Fourth Amendment is extremely important for those being investigated of a crime to understand. It protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures by government officials. A search can either mean getting frisked by a police officer to a search of an individual’s home or car. The test for determining whether a search has occurred is whether the searched person has an expectation of privacy in the place searched and whether that expectation of privacy is considered objectively reasonable by society. As a general rule, any search conducted without a search warrant and supported by probable cause is unreasonable. However, in certain situations, police officers may be permitted to conduct a search without first obtaining a warrant. Specifically, police may stop and frisk a person if they reasonably believe that person might be engaged in criminal activity and that they might be armed with a weapon and dangerous.
A seizure is when the government takes control of an individual (such as an arrest) or something in his or her possession. Items that are seized often are used as evidence when individuals are charged with a crime. If evidence of a crime was obtained illegally, the Fourth Amendment provides that such evidence may be excluded at Trial. And such exclusion may in fact be fatal to the State’s case. For a more extensive discussion of the Fourth Amendment and its protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, please visit our article “Know Your Rights – Searches and Seizures.”
Protection Against Double Jeopardy
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that a person may not be prosecuted twice for the same offense following an acquittal or conviction. The United States Supreme Court has also held that the double jeopardy clause prohibits multiple punishments for the same crime. This clause makes sense—as our government should not have the unlimited power to prosecute and punish criminal suspects. The government only gets one chance to prove its case—and when RAM Law PLLC obtains an acquittal—our clients cannot be charged with the same crime again.
Right Against Self-Incrimination
The Fifth Amendment also provides individuals with the right against self-incrimination. Specifically, if you are being questioned by law enforcement about your involvement in a crime, you do not have to answer their questions. To the contrary, you have the right to remain silent. In fact, you should remain silent—as anything you say can be used against you in court. You do not have to reveal information to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that may lead to you being prosecuted with a crime. Even if you are in fact guilty of a crime, you should never attempt to “talk your way out of it.” It is the State’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt—and—if you remain silent—the State will be forced to come up with other evidence to prove its case—which may be difficult for them to do. If the police force a suspect to confess to the commission of a crime, the court may not allow the confession to be used as evidence.
The right to remain silent also means that criminal defendants have the right not to take the witness stand at all during his or her trial, and the prosecutor may not comment on the defendant not testifying at trial. It is important to note that the right to remain silent only applies to testimonial acts, such as speaking, nodding or writing—and does not apply to other personal information that might be incriminating (i.e. hair samples, DNA samples, fingerprints). And, incriminating statements that an individual makes voluntarily are not protected by the Fifth Amendment
The Right to Due Process
The Fifth Amendment also provides people with the right to due process. This has historically meant that people accused of crimes could not be imprisoned without fair procedures being followed. However, over time this has expanded to mean that individuals not only had the right to a fair process but that they also have the right to enjoy fundamental liberties without government interference.
Often at issue in termination of parental rights proceedings, the Due Process Clause protects parents’ fundamental liberty interest in custody and care of their children. In re Welfare of HGB, 306 N.W.2d 821, 825 (Minn. 1981). The amount of process due before depriving a parent of this right varies with the circumstances of each case. Procedural due process requires “notice, a timely opportunity for a hearing, the right to counsel, the opportunity to present evidence, the right to an impartial decision-maker, and the right to a reasonable decision based solely on the record.” In re Welfare of Children of D.F., 752 N.W.2d 88, 97 (Minn. App. 2008). In determining whether a parent was deprived of the parent’s procedural-due-process rights, courts balance (1) the private interest affected by the government action; (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation of that interest and the value of additional procedural safeguards; and (3) the government’s interest. In re Welfare of Children of B.J.B., 747 N.W.2d 605, 607 (Minn. App. 2008). This balancing test “embodies the notion of fundamental fairness.” In re Child of P.T., 657 N.W.2d 577, 587 (Minn. App. 2003).
While the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause only applies to federal government action, the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment made it applicable to the States. If your Termination of Parental Rights or Criminal Jury Trial felt fundamentally unfair, it is possible that your procedural due process rights were violated—and you may in fact be entitled to a new trial.
Right to a Jury Trial
If you have been charged with a crime, the Sixth Amendment becomes very important. Specifically, you have the right to a jury trial. The idea is that—given the seriousness of being charged with a crime—independent people from the surrounding community who are willing to decide the case based only on the evidence—can best ensure that the trial is fair and that wrongful convictions are limited.
Right to a Speedy Trial
The right to a speedy trial is very important—especially if you are being held in jail pending the outcome of the case. Without this right, criminal defendants could be held in jail indefinitely without the State needing to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. This right becomes less critical for defendants that have posted bail and are released on their own recognizance as they await trial. Many times, criminal defense lawyers will waive this right if their client is not incarcerated.
The Confrontation Clause
The confrontation clause prevents hearsay from being introduced into court against a criminal defendant to support a conviction. Rather than prove their case by relying on witnesses’ out of court statements, the confrontation clause generally requires prosecutors to put their witnesses on the witness stand where they can be sworn in under oath. While criminal defendants typically have the right to confront hostile witnesses through cross examination—which is a right provided by the confrontation clause—there are certain exceptions. For instance, if a witness is unavailable at the time of trial (i.e. they are deceased), their previous statements may be allowed into evidence.
The Right to Assistance of Counsel
The Sixth Amendment also provides criminal defendants with the right to have an attorney defend him or her at trial. While the government is required to provide a lawyer to defendants who cannot pay for their own lawyer (i.e. public defenders), it is important to note that the lack of resources and heavy case load often makes it so public defenders do not have sufficient time to allot to each individual case. Therefore, it is recommended that you retain an experienced private defense attorney to represent you at a criminal jury trial.
No Excessive Bail
The Eighth Amendment provides that bail—the amount of money that a criminal defendant pays in exchange for his release from jail before trial—may not be excessive. Bail is returned to the criminal defendant when he or she appears at trial but is forfeited to the government if he or she does not appear. Bail is “excessive” and unconstitutional when it is set at an amount so high that even the richest of defendants could not pay it. While bail may not be excessive, it is important to note that the Constitution does not require a defendant to be released on bail at all. For instance, when a criminal defendant is a flight risk (i.e. at risk of running away if released) or is a danger to public safety, the court may deny bail entirely and hold the defendant incarcerated pending Trial.
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The Eighth Amendment also prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. This simply prohibits punishments that are grossly disproportionate and too harsh for the particular crime. Therefore, a Minnesotan who is convicted of a DUI cannot be punished for that crime by serving their entire life in prison.
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
The United States Supreme Court has held that some rights are so “fundamental” that any law restricting them must have an especially strong purpose and be narrowly tailored to serve that purpose without unnecessary restrictions. Most of the rights are spelled out above—in the first ten amendments of the United States Constitution—or Bill of Rights. However, the Supreme Court has recognized other fundamental rights that are not spelled out in the Constitution but that are nevertheless an inherent part of liberty and deeply rooted in our country’s tradition and history. These rights include, but are not limited to:
1. The right to marry;
2. The right to procreate; and
3. The right to control the upbringing of your children (which is a right the attorneys at RAM Law PLLC rigorously fight for during every termination of parental rights trial).
CONSULT AN ATTORNEY
If you believe that any branch of government—such as a public school, law enforcement, or elected official—has violated your constitutional rights—it is important to speak to a lawyer who has profound knowledge and understanding of both the United States and Minnesota Constitutions. While the above is a high-level overview of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of its text has led to certain complexities that only an experienced team of attorneys can understand. The attorneys at RAM Law PLLC analyze the constitution—and the case law interpreting it—and make well-grounded legal arguments to protect our clients’ rights in all of our criminal, family law, and termination of parental rights cases. The Constitution also applies to our landlord-tenant law cases, as well—to the extent that it protects certain property rights. Contact the attorneys at RAM Law PLLC at 651-468-2104 to schedule your case evaluation today.