Timing is the first distinction. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches when adversarial judicial proceedings begin, such as through a formal charge or arraignment, and it applies at trial and other critical stages. That is different from Miranda's counsel safeguard during custodial interrogation, which can operate before any charge. It is also offense specific. After attachment, deliberate government elicitation about the charged offense can implicate the Sixth Amendment even when the same facts would not be described simply as a failure to give warnings. A beginner should ask two separate questions: Has prosecution begun? What proceeding or police conduct followed?

The remaining guarantees organize the path to trial. A speedy-trial claim addresses unjustified delay after accusation. A public trial guards against secret adjudication. Jury rules protect an impartial decision maker. Confrontation permits testing the prosecution's testimonial witnesses through cross-examination; compulsory process enables the defense to secure witnesses and evidence of its own. Notice ensures that the accusation is specific enough to permit a defense. A single case can involve several of these rights, but the fact pattern usually points most directly to one problem-delay, secrecy, bias, adverse testimony, missing defense evidence, or lack of legal assistance.

Suppose police arrange a live, postindictment lineup without notifying counsel. Because formal proceedings have begun and the lineup is a critical stage, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is the natural starting point. If officers instead question an uncharged suspect in custody, the Fifth Amendment and Miranda come first. If a judge closes a trial solely to avoid public criticism, the public-trial guarantee is implicated. Do not answer with "the Sixth Amendment" and stop. Name the particular guarantee, its trigger, the stage at which it applies, and the consequence the defendant seeks.

Video lesson: Due Process of Law: Crash Course Government and Politics #28