The Difference between Federal and State Legal System

Student’s name

Professor’s name

Class Name

Date assignment is due

The Difference between Federal and State Legal System

The U.S Constitution, the supreme law in the US, creates a provision in which power is shared between federal government and state governments. While state federal system deals with matters pertaining to state tort cases, criminal, probate, juvenile, and family law; the federal legal system addresses matters pertaining to interstate disputes, international issues, through Courts of Appeals and Supreme Court which is the final arbiter of federal constitutional questions. Decisions made under state legal system can be re-addressed in federal system in case of dissatisfaction.

Supreme Court’s Position on Miranda Warning

The Supreme Court’s interpretation on whether a law enforcement officer has to provide warning about self-incrimination when a suspect will be charged with a misdemeanor is that the law allows for exceptions. The court maintained that a private citizen may arrest a person if the citizen has probable cause to believe that the person has committed felony; or the officer actually witnessed a suspect commit or attempt to commit misdemeanor, with or without Miranda warning. The court asserts that law enforcement officers outside their territorial jurisdiction have the same authority as private citizens to arrest without a warrant (Ferdico, Fradella and Totten, 796).

Specific Amendments Addressing The Concept Of Due Process

Due process is a legal requirement that the state has an obligation to respect all of the legal rights owed to a person. It overlaps with the eighth amendment that guarantees reliable procedures that protect innocent people from being prosecuted. The fourteenth amendment that affects due process focuses on three types of rights: the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights, restriction on the political process, and the rights of discrete and insular minorities. Other amendments that shallowly touch on due process are the first, the fifth, the sixth and the ninth amendments (Ferdico, Fradella and Totten 678).

When A Person Has A Right To Access To Counsel During An Identification Process

Taking the case United States versus Wade, 388 U.S 218 (1967), the Supreme Court maintains that persons subjected to lineups after they have been indicted are entitled to the assistance of counsel as provide for in the sixth amendment. The court asserts that the right to counsel also attaches at post charge show ups. However, there is no right to counsel at a photo array, regardless of whether it occurs before or after normal charging. The right to counsel therefore attaches only after formal charge (Ferdico, Fradella and Totten, 737).

Work Cited

John N. Ferdico, Henry, F. Fradella and Christopher, D. Totten. Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional. California: Wadsworth. 2011