Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.
I’m studying for my Law class and need an explanation.In 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:If your last name begins with A through N you must argue in favor of the majority’s decision in the case. (Finding that the detectives did not violate Thompkins’ Miranda rights).Remember to support your required position with what you have learned from this week’s assigned reading about constitutional safeguards.If your opinion varies from the position you are being required to take, you may include such a statement in your discussion post.
This article discusses the majority and dissenting opinions in Berghuis v. Thompkins. You can also listen to the oral arguments made before the United States Supreme Court.Berghuis v. Thompkins. (2010). Oyez Oyez. Regardless of whether you are an attorney arguing in court or a business stakeholder pitching to shareholders or a potential client, adding support for your argument from appropriate resources strengthens your content. For this discussion board, be sure to include a citation to an appropriate source that supports the point you are making
Requirements: 350 words