Requirementsof Obtaining Admissible Statements
Thereare various similarities of the legal requirements of obtainingadmissible statements in the states of Arizona, Illinois, New Yorkand California. In Arizona, a defendant who is in custody andundergoing interrogation need to know their rights first, as providedin the Fifth Amendment of the country’s constitution which allowsindividuals to be free of self-incrimination. The defendant can thensubmit the admissible statements when he knows all his or her rightsin order to avoid incriminating himself or herself. In Illinois, thecourt determines the admissibility of statements or evidence incourt. The court is not required to fulfill the rules of evidenceexcept the ones that concern privileges.
Thelegal requirement of New York is almost similar as that of Arizonabecause the evidence gathered by the defendant himself should be theonly statement to be accepted in court. This shows that in bothstates the defendant must have been aware of his or her rights tosubmit the evidence he or she gathered by himself. No one shouldforce the defendant to bring the evidence because it is his or herown right to make the decision as required by the Fifth Amendment. InCalifornia, the judge makes the final decision on whether theevidence is admissible or not (State of California, 2015). This issimilar the legal requirement of Illinois where the court determinesthe admissibility of statements or evidence in court. In all the fourstates, the courts allow defendants to provide statements andevidence, and the legal requirements depend on the individualdefendants and the courts.
Stateof California (2015). GettingEvidence for Court.Accessed July 18, 2015 fromhttp://www.ca.gov/Apps/SearchNew.aspx?search=court+evidence&cx=001779225245372747843%3Amdsmtl_vi1a&cof=&ie=UTF-8&submit.x=18&submit.y=25