Protections under 5th Amendment:

1- Right to Grand Jury Indictment:

Individuals have the right to a grand jury indictment for serious federal crimes. A grand jury decides that
if enough evidences exists for charges, protecting against unfair prosecution.

2- Protection against Double Jeopardy:

The Double Jeopardy Clause protects individuals from being tried twice for the same act. It guarantees
three rights:

 no second trial after acquittal,

3- Right against Self Incrimination:

The Fifth Amendment protects individuals from being forced to testify or confess if their answers could
incriminate them. They can "plead the Fifth" to avoid self-incrimination and giving testimony against
their will.

4- Due Process of Law:

Due process means the government must follow fair and just procedures before taking away a person’s
life, freedom, or property, respecting all constitutional rights. It includes procedural due process, which
ensures fair hearings, proper notice, and jurisdiction of courts to decide cases, and substantive due
process, which protects fundamental rights essential to liberties.

5- Eminent Domain:

The Just Compensation Clause ensures that when the government acquires private property for public
use, it must pay a fair price, typically the market value at the time. This protects owners from arbitrary
or compulsory expropriation.

Significance:

The rights given in 5th Amendment of USA Constitution are significant in protecting individual liberties in
the following ways:

Grand Jury Indictment Protection against arbitrary prosecution

Double Jeopardy Protection against repeated trials or punishments

Self Incrimination Protection against forced confession

Due Process Protection of life, liberty, and property

Case Laws:

1- Miranda Vs Arizona (1966)

Citation: 384 U.S. 436

Appellant: Ernesto Miranda

Respondent: State of Arizona

Facts:

 Ernesto Miranda was arrested in 1963 for kidnapping and rape.

Judgement:

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, set a side Miranda's conviction. The Court stated that
prosecution couldn't use statements made during police questioning unless it showed that the accused
was informed of their right to remain silent and to have a lawyer to ensure right against self-
incrimination . This created the "Miranda rights," which require police to tell suspects their rights before
questioning.

Reasoning behind judgement:

The court reasoning was that during police investigation, individuals must know their constitutional
rights. Without this awareness, any confession they make is forced and violates the Fifth Amendment's
protection against self-incrimination.

Impact on 5th Amendment Jurisprudence:

The decision of the case has impacted fifth amendment Jurisprudence by establishing that individual
must inform of their rights prior to self-incrimination and custodial interrogation. The "Miranda Rights"
has become a standard in law enforcement safeguarding individuals from self-incrimination. For
example in Dickerson v. United States (2000), reaffirmed the necessity of Miranda Rights, stating that
they are constitutionally required.

2- Benton v. Maryland (1969)

Appellant: John Dalmer Benton

Respondent: State of Maryland

Facts:

Benton was tried in Maryland for burglary and larceny.

He was acquitted of larceny but convicted of burglary and sentenced to 10 years.

Later, Maryland's highest court ruled that requiring jurors to believe in God was unconstitutional,
invalidating his trial.

Benton chose a retrial but was recharged with both burglary and larceny despite objecting on double
jeopardy grounds.

Benton appealed in SC against his conviction.

Judgment:

The U.S. Supreme Court set a side Benton’s larceny conviction and concluded that his retrial for larceny
violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Court also ruled that the Double
Jeopardy Clause is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Reasoning Behind the Judgment:

Justice Thurgood Marshall ,who wrote majority opinion, concluded that the Double Jeopardy Clause is a
fundamental right protected by the Fifth Amendment and applies to state governments through the Due
Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment . The Court determined that retrying Benton for larceny, after
he had been acquitted of the charge in his first trial, was unconstitutional and constituted double
jeopardy.

Impact on 5th Amendment Jurisprudence:

The ruling in "Benton V. Maryland" was a landmark judgement emphasizing the Double Jeopardy Clause
of Fifth Amendment as fundamental Constitutional protection. The ruling strengthened the principle
that an individual cannot be tried twice for the same offense ensuring justice and fairness. This landmark
case applied the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause to states through the doctrine of
incorporation.