Mediaboss Marketing

noun 1.

an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, providing chiefly that no person be required to testify against himself or herself in a criminal case and that no person be subjected to a second trial for an offense for which he or she has been duly tried previously.

British Dictionary definitions for fifth-amendment Expand

an amendment to the US Constitution stating that no person may be compelled to testify against himself and that no person may be tried for a second time on a charge for which he has already been acquitted

(US) take the fifth, take the fifth amendment, to refuse to answer a question on the grounds that it might incriminate oneself

fifth-amendment in Culture Expand

One of the ten amendments to the United States Constitution that make up the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment imposes restrictions on the government's prosecution of persons accused of crimes. It prohibits self-incrimination and double jeopardy and mandates due process of law.

Read the original post:
Fifth-amendment | Define Fifth-amendment at Dictionary.com

Fifth Amendment - The Text No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Fifth Amendment - The Meaning Grand Jury Protection: The Fifth Amendment requirement that serious federal criminal charges be started by a grand jury (a group of citizens who hear evidence from a prosecutor about potential crimes) is rooted in English common law. Its basic purpose is to provide a fair method for beginning criminal proceedings against those accused of committing crimes. Grand jury charges can be issued against anyone except members of the military, who are instead subject to courts-martial in the military justice system.

To avoid giving government unchecked powers, grand jurors are selected from the general population and their work, conducted in secret, is not hampered by rigid rules about the type of evidence that can be heard. In fact, grand jurors can act on their own knowledge and are free to start criminal proceedings on any information that they think relevant.

It is these broad powers that have led some critics to charge that grand juries are little more than puppets of prosecutors. Grand juries also serve an investigative role-because grand juries can compel witnesses to testify in the absence of their lawyers.

A significant number of states do not use grand juries, instead they begin criminal proceedings using informations or indictments. The right to a grand jury is one of only a few protections in the Bill of Rights that has not been applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Protection against Double Jeopardy: This portion of the Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being twice put in jeopardy of life or limbthat is, in danger of being punished more than once for the same criminal act. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the double jeopardy clause to protect against a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal or conviction and against multiple punishments for the same crime. Like other provisions in the Bill of Rights that affect criminal prosecutions, the double jeopardy clause is rooted in the idea that the government should not have unlimited power to prosecute and punish criminal suspects. Rather, the government gets only one chance to make its case.

Right against Self-Incrimination: This provision of the Fifth Amendment is probably the best-known of all constitutional rights, as it appears frequently on television and in movieswhether in dramatic courtroom scenes (I take the Fifth!) or before the police question someone in their custody (You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do say can be used against you in a court of law.). The right protects a person from being forced to reveal to the police, prosecutor, judge, or jury any information that might subject him or her to criminal prosecution. Even if a person is guilty of a crime, the Fifth Amendment demands that the prosecutors come up with other evidence to prove their case. If police violate the Fifth Amendment by forcing a suspect to confess, a court may suppress the confession, that is, prohibit it from being used as evidence at trial.

The right to remain silent also means that a defendant has the right not to take the witness stand at all during his or her trial, and that the prosecutor cannot point to the defendants silence as evidence of guilt. There are, however, limitations on the right against self-incrimination. For example, it applies only to testimonial acts, such as speaking, nodding, or writing. Other personal information that might be incriminating, like blood or hair samples, DNA or fingerprints, may be used as evidence. Similarly, incriminating statements that an individual makes voluntarilysuch as when a suspect confesses to a friend or writes in a personal diaryare not protected.

Right to Due Process: The right to due process of law has been recognized since 1215, when the Magna Carta (the British charter) was adopted. Historically, the right protected people accused of crimes from being imprisoned without fair procedures (like indictments and trials, where they would have an opportunity to confront their accusers). The right of due process has grown in two directions: It affords individuals a right to a fair process (known as procedural due process) and a right to enjoy certain fundamental liberties without governmental interference (known as substantive due process). The Fifth Amendments due process clause applies to the federal governments conduct. In 1868 the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment expanded the right of due process to include limits on the actions of state governments.

Today, court decisions interpreting the Fourteenth Amendments due process right generally apply to the Fifth Amendment and vice versa.

Takings Clause: The takings clause of the Fifth Amendment strikes a balance between the rights of private property owners and the right of the government to take that property for a purpose that benefits the public at large. When the government takes private property, it is required to pay just compensation to the property owner for his or her loss. The takings power of the government, sometimes referred to as the power of eminent domain, may be used for a wide range of valid public uses (for a highway or a park, for example). For the most part, when defining just compensation, courts try to reach some approximation of market value.

Read more:
Annenberg Classroom - Fifth Amendment

For Immediate Release December 17, 2013

The Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board today levied a $100,000 civil penalty against the Minnesota DFL Senate Caucus for illegal campaign coordination with thirteen of their candidates in the 2012 election.

In its ruling, the Board indicated it also plans to fine each of the candidates campaigns, since properly reclassifying the expenditures means that the candidates illegally exceeded their campaign contribution and/or spending limits. A total of over $300,000 in illegal contributions were not reported by the campaigns.

Senate Democrats were so intent on winning at any cost and throwing huge money into the 2012 campaign that they played fast and loose in a big way, said Keith Downey, Chairman of the Republican Party of Minnesota. Even though it is over a year too late for the voters in these thirteen districts, and the ruling says nothing about the truthfulness of their ads, todays ruling does at least provide a much needed check on their campaign financing tactics.

Downey continued, Many of the Democratic Senators on this list won their elections by narrow margins. We will never know how this illegal coordination would have impacted the results in these races and ultimately control of the legislature. They cheated, they won, but at least they are being held accountable now.

We look forward to the Campaign Finance Boards continued investigation and expect them to thoroughly examine each of the thirteen campaigns to determine the full extent of this wrongdoing, Downey concluded.

Read the original:
CD2 Republicans - Home

ABA Journal's Blawg 100 (2015)

by John Wesley Hall Criminal Defense Lawyer and Search and seizure law consultant Little Rock, Arkansas Contact / The Book http://www.johnwesleyhall.com

2003-16, online since Feb. 24, 2003 real non-robot URL hits since 2010; approx. 18k posts since 2003

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fourth Amendment cases, citations, and links

Latest Slip Opinions: U.S. Supreme Court (Home) Federal Appellate Courts Opinions First Circuit Second Circuit Third Circuit Fourth Circuit Fifth Circuit Sixth Circuit Seventh Circuit Eighth Circuit Ninth Circuit Tenth Circuit Eleventh Circuit D.C. Circuit Federal Circuit Foreign Intell.Surv.Ct. FDsys, many district courts, other federal courts, other Military Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF, N-M, CG State courts (and some USDC opinions)

Google Scholar Advanced Google Scholar Google search tips LexisWeb LII State Appellate Courts LexisONE free caselaw Findlaw Free Opinions To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $

Research Links: Supreme Court: SCOTUSBlog S. Ct. Docket Solicitor General's site SCOTUSreport Briefs online (but no amicus briefs) Curiae (Yale Law) Oyez Project (NWU) "On the Docket"Medill S.Ct. Monitor: Law.com S.Ct. Com't'ry: Law.com

General (many free): LexisWeb Google Scholar | Google LexisOne Legal Website Directory Crimelynx Lexis.com $ Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $ Findlaw.com Findlaw.com (4th Amd) Westlaw.com $ F.R.Crim.P. 41 http://www.fd.org FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf) DEA Agents Manual (2002) (download) DOJ Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf) Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)

Congressional Research Service: --Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Outline of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012) ACLU on privacy Privacy Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation NACDLs Domestic Drone Information Center Electronic Privacy Information Center Criminal Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.) Section 1983 Blog

"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." Me

I still learn something new every day. Pete Townshend, The Who 50th Anniversary Tour, "The Who Live at Hyde Park" (Showtime 2015)

"I can't talk about my singing. I'm inside it. How can you describe something you're inside of?" Janis Joplin

"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government." Shemaya, in the Thalmud

"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).

"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).

Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment. Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).

"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).

"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)

"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)

"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has notto put it mildlyrun smooth." Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).

"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)

"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)

Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Governments purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)

Libertythe freedom from unwarranted intrusion by governmentis as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark. United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)

"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." Mick Jagger & Keith Richards

"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for meand by that time there was nobody left to speak up." Martin Niemller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]

You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men! "The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)

Read more here:
CA2: Crossing threshold to arrest without warrant violates ...

The Ohio Republican Party is the Ohio state affiliate of the United States Republican Party. It was founded in Columbus, Ohio on February 13, 1854.[1]

From the Civil War era, Ohio politics was dominated by the Republican Party, with Ohio Republicans playing key roles in the national party. As the National Republican party slowly began to change from a party affiliated with Northern States and into a socially conservative, neo-liberal economic party, so has the Ohio Republican Party.

Early Ohio Republicans such as Salmon P. Chase staffed many important national offices. Chase coined the phrase "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men".[2] Starting in the 1880s, Ohio's Marcus A. Hanna was a significant power in the back rooms of the national Republican party. In the 1890s, Hanna led the conservative wing of the party against Theodore Roosevelt's progressive movement.

In the 60 years from 1860 to 1920, Ohioans headed the Republican presidential ticket nine times, losing only twice. In 1912, Democrat candidate Woodrow Wilson won with 40.96 percent of the vote, the Republican ticket was split, with Teddy Roosevelt leaving to start the Bull-Moose Party. In the 1916 election, Wilson won again with 49.24 percent of the vote.

During the next three presidential elections, the Republican candidate won Ohio, until 1932 when Franklin D. Roosevelt won the state. FDR would win Ohio in 1932, 1936, and 1940.[3]

The national political upheaval that ushered in the New Deal era in the 1930s benefited the Ohio Democratic Party. Party politics in Ohio became very competitive, with Republicans and Democrats trading victories at all levels.

During this time Robert A. Taft, known as "Mr. Republican," became the leader of the conservative wing of the Republican party during a time when progressives controlled both major parties, and one of the most popular Senators in Ohio history.

From the 1930s to the 1970s, Republicans still won the majority of elective offices in Ohio. Starting in the 1960s Ohio Democrats began to win more elections with rulings from the United States Supreme Court that required district representation be based on population and not land sized. The equalization of legislative districts shifted power to Ohio's cities and away from rural farmers. By the mid-1980s, Ohio government at all levels was dominated by Democrats.

By 1990, the Republicans had won a majority on the Ohio Apportionment Board, which draws district lines for federal and state legislative seats. The 1992 adoption of term limits by referendum further strengthened the party's hand and 1992 marked the last victory by a Democrat (John Glenn) in a statewide race until 2006.

Redistricting after the 2000 census combined with Ohio's term limits laws had Republican officeholders at the federal and state levels struggling with each other to draw federal congressional districts to create safe seats, with the interests of incumbent US representatives clashing with the interests of state legislators facing term limits looking to Congress for their next jobs. About 43 percent of the voters voted for Democrats in 2000.

Joe Hallett wrote in the Columbus Dispatch (January 13, 2002):

Redistricting should be a happy process for Republicans.... But the task has hardly been gleeful. Contrarily, it has turned into an embarrassment for Republicans.... Eight-year term limits, more than the state budget, are to blame. These days, state lawmakers constantly are scouting their next jobs.... [V]isions of Congress dance in their heads. They want districts ready-made for their ascensions. Meanwhile, congressional incumbents constantly angle for districts they can't possibly lose.

Although term limits were pushed by conservative Republican activists in the 1980s, they forced the retirement of Republican Speaker Jo Ann Davidson (R-Columbus) from the House of Representatives in 2001 as well as the leader of the conservative wing of the party, Deputy Speaker William G. Batchelder (R-Medina).

In 2001, Republicans sought United States House of Representatives seats held by Democrats Sherrod Brown and Ted Strickland. The state legislature considered redrawing their districts. Critics allege the motivation was to aid in Republican victories. When Democrat Brown threatened to run for governor in 2002, if he lost his seat through redistricting, the legislature scrapped redistricting plans. Republican Governor Taft won re-election. Taft was challenged by Cuyahoga County commissioner Tim Hagan. Both Brown and Strickland held onto their congressional seats.

By 2004, Republicans held all six statewide executive offices (governor/lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state, auditor, and treasurer), a two-thirds majority in the state senate and house, a 5-2 majority on the Supreme Court, both seats in the US Senate, and 12 of Ohio's 18 seats in the US House of Representatives. In 2006, Democrats began to retake some statewide offices. These include all of the executive offices except State Auditor (including the governorship going to Ted Strickland over Republican challenger J. Kenneth Blackwell) and one of the seats in the US Senate (Sherrod Brown defeating incumbent Mike DeWine).

Ohio Republicans still held ten seats in the US House of Representatives, one seat in the U.S. Senate, and a majority in both houses of the Ohio General Assembly. Between the election of Robert Cupp in 2007, the death of Chief Justice Thomas Moyer, and the appointment of Democrat Eric Brown in 2010, Republicans had controlled all seven seats on the Ohio Supreme Court previously.

In 2008, Democrat Presidential Candidate Barack Obama defeated Republican Candidate John McCain in Ohio.

In 2010, Republicans regained all of the statewide elected executive offices, including the governorship with the election of John Kasich, and regained the majority in the state House of Representatives and retaining the state Senate. Republicans also retained their seat in the U.S. Senate with the election of Rob Portman and retained a majority of the seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. In addition, 8th District Representative John Boehner was elected Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, making him third in line of succession (and the highest ranking Republican) to the Presidency of the United States.

In November 2011, Gov. John Kasich's law that limits public worker's union bargain abilities was voted down by the people of Ohio.[4] This was a major blow to the platform that Gov. Kasich ran on in 2010.

The Taft Family has been one of the most powerful political families in US History. Robert Taft, Sr. was the first Taft to come to America, around the 1670s. The Ohio section of Taft's are descendants of Robert, Sr.

The start of the five generations of Taft's in politics was with Alphonso Taft. He was the founder of the Ohio political dynasty that is associated with the Republican Party. Alphonso was in President Ulysses S. Grant's Cabinet, first as Attorney General then as Secretary of War. He was later appointed US Ambassador to the Austria-Hungary Empire.[5]

Three of Alphonso's sons entered into politics also, former US Representative of Ohio's 1st District Charles Phelps Taft, former US President and Chief Justice of the United States William Howard Taft, and former Republican Party Delegate Henry Waters Taft.

Both of William H. Taft's sons entered into politics. Robert A. Taft was a former US Senator and his other son Charles Phelps Taft II was former Mayor of Cincinnati. Both men were seen as great politicians.

The next generation of Taft politicians came from two of Robert's children. Robert Taft, Jr. served in both houses of the US Congress. His brother William Howard Taft III was Ambassador to Ireland.

The current generation of Taft's in politics are former Ohio Governor Bob Taft, son of Robert Taft Jr. William Howard Taft IV, son of William H. Taft III, has been an Ambassador to NATO and United States Deputy Secretary of Defense.

In 2005, the Republican fundraiser and coin dealer Thomas Noe ran a rare coin fund that the State of Ohio had invested $50 million in.[6] Soon valuable coins came up missing and an investigation discovered Noe had taken around $13 million from the fund. He was convicted in 2006 and was sentenced to 18 years in state prison.[citation needed]

Noe was a top fundraiser for the George W. Bush campaign in Ohio in 2004, and the chairman for his campaign in Northwest Ohio. He was later convicted of making illegal contributions to the Bush campaign.[citation needed]

Noe had ties to then Governor Bob Taft. It was discovered through this scandal that the Governor and some of his top aides took improper gifts from Noe and other lobbyist.[citation needed] In 2005, Gov. Taft was charged with four misdemeanors related to these gifts.[citation needed]

This scandal had a negative effect on the Ohio Republican Party, who lost many seats in congress after 2006 and the Governorship went to Ted Strickland. In 2008, Barack Obama won Ohio's 20 electoral college votes on his way to the presidency.

Ohio Republicans use the same symbols used by the national Republican Party, such as the elephant. The Ohio Republican Party logo features a white elephant silhouette over the shape of Ohio in red, with blue outlining its northern border.

See more here:
Ohio Republican Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia