Premium Essay

Miranda vs Arizona

In: Other Topics

Submitted By MA1234
Words 1127
Pages 5
Miranda v Arizona

Westwood College

Miranda v. Arizona Every time someone is arrested the police officer reads them their right, which was not always the case. They read as followed "you have the right to remain silent anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to an attorney, if you can't afford one, one will be provided to you." But why do the officers have to remind the people of their rights, because of the Miranda v. Arizona case. Before the Miranda v. Arizona case people were not reminded or even aware that they had such rights. In the 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape. He was accused of kidnapping and raping a young girl and when the officers arrested Miranda and then the victim identified him. After the trial was done Miranda was found guilty because after being interrogated for a couple hours he confessed to the crime not knowing that the 5th amendment states you don't have to plead guilty if you do not want to. That is what self incrimination is, for example when Miranda was being asked about the crime he did not have to answer he could of just said he plead the 5th and said he wanted to wait for an attorney to both consult him and be with him while he was being interrogated. If Miranda would have known that he had that right he probably would not have incriminated himself. Miranda was also known to have some mental problems and only had a 9th grade education, so not having an attorney on his side made it even harder for him to understand the process of interrogation. The case was so controversial that it made it to the Supreme Court. It was controversial because Miranda confessed to the crime but still thought he should of known he could of plead the 5th amendment and prolonged his trial until more evidence...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Miranda vs. Arizona

...February 25, 2013 PLS 135 Miranda vs. Arizona In Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. Ernesto Miranda was the plaintiff and the state of Arizona was the defendant. Ernesto Miranda was convicted of the March 1963 kidnapping and rape of an eighteen-year-old girl in Phoenix, Arizona. After the crime the police picked up Miranda because he fit the description of the girl’s attacker. The officers took him into an interrogation room and told him that he had been identified by the victim, although that was false. After the police questioned Miranda for two hours, he confessed. At the trial, the defense counsel tricked one of the detectives into admitting that Miranda was never given the opportunity to seek advice from an attorney before his interrogation. Miranda was convicted and sentenced to 40-60 years in prison. When he tried to appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court set aside his conviction. Then Chief Justice Warren wrote: “Prior to and questioning, the person must be warned that he has the right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed…” Miranda was retried, only this time without his confession being introduced into evidence at the trial, he was convicted again....

Words: 589 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Miranda vs Arizona

...Decision and Rationale of the Court The case of Miranda v Arizona was 5-4 majority. The Supreme Court ruled that statements made by a defendant in response to an interrogation in police custody could be admissible in trial only if the...

Words: 510 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Cja374

...Running Head: Supreme Court Case Analysis 1 Supreme Court Case Analysis Team A - CJA/364 Instructor: Timijanel Odom 05/20/2015 Supreme Court Case Analysis 2 The Miranda v. Arizona was the biggest case ever in the United States. The Supreme Court argued four different cases because of the Miranda vs. Arizona case. These four different cases were heard and it was stated that 3 of the 4 cases had written statements that were admissible in court. In this paper we will describe the facts of the four cases, we will notate when they were argued, we will describe what lawyers argued what side, we will discuss the arguments of counsel about self-incrimination and we will write about why are the cases significant to a right to counsel and self-incrimination. Miranda vs. Arizona, in this case defendant Ernesto Miranda was 23 years old when he was arrested and charged with several crimes including rape and kidnapping. Ernesto Miranda was an immigrant that was living here in the United States of America. During his arrest Ernesto Miranda was notified of his constitutional rights, but in reality he wasn’t supposed to because he was not a citizen so he had no rights. Ernesto Miranda was taken in and then was questioned about the crimes that were committed, after a couple hours of interrogation Ernesto Miranda gave the police a written statement that he signed....

Words: 869 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Government Paper

...Define due process and its origins. According to our text book; "The Due Process is protection against arbitrary deprivation of life, liberty, or property as guaranteed in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments." (Wilson, 2009, p. 33). The origins of the due process can be traced back to 1868 thanks to the fourteenth amendment being ratified that year. What is vital to know about the fourth teen amendment is this "No state shall deprive any person life of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (Wilson, 2009, p. 33). When I think of due process the first think that comes to my mind is being arrested. During my research on the topic I found some very interesting information in regards to the due process. I found information that states the term due process is much older than 1868. According to Barnabas D. Johnson "The phrase "due process of law" originated in a 1355 restatement of the 1215 Magna Carta, by which for the first time in history (at least in relation to the rights of ordinary people) "the government" — in this case, King John of England — was brought "under the law" ... that is, became subject to something called "the law of the land" which he was not empowered to alter in its fundamental character. This is the origin of the concept of "government under law" as distinct from merely "government by laws";" (Johnson, 2005) I found that information to be unique because more people like myself think......

Words: 668 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Miranda V Arizona

...Miranda v. Arizona: Half a Century Later by: September 2nd, 2014 I. INTRODUCTION A. Executive Summary – In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court deliberated the case Miranda v. Arizona the most important aspect of due process and criminal procedure ever affecting law enforcement and prosecutorial conduct of an investigation. The main issues in this case were: * The admissibility of a defendant’s statements if such statements were made while the defendant was held in police custody or deprived of freedom of movement in a significant way; * What procedures were required to guarantee the defendant’s privilege against self-incrimination according to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution? This case is considered the summit of the criminal procedure evolution establishing specific procedures to safeguard the rights of defendants beyond the courtroom and onto the police station. The procedural details and the breadth of civil rights tangled in these four cases, made this decision the pinnacle case in the area of criminal procedure. Nowadays, this decision gave the name to what is widely known as the “Miranda Warnings” which include: 1. The suspect has the right to remain silent, 2. Anything he/she says may be used as evidence against him, 3. He/she has a right to the presence of an attorney during questioning, and 4. If indigent, he/she has a right to a lawyer selected for him without charge. II....

Words: 1278 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Miranda Warnings

...Constitution – The Miranda Warning Technically, The Miranda Warning is not in the U.S. Constitution. The Miranda Warning came about after Miranda vs. Arizona in 1966. But it refers to the Fifth Amendment right that protects against self-incrimination, or "the right to remain silent". (Cornell) Amendment V “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 offense 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.” (Mount 2010) Basically, the 5th amendment is to protect people in situations from getting in trouble it even protects ignorant suspects from incriminating themselves. In particular, it stops you from having to speak to the police or testify against yourself before a court, so it is best to keep your mouth shut until you have a lawyer....

Words: 1245 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

To What Extent Has the Roberts Court Witnessed a Revival of Conservative Activism?

...Warren Court Cases | 1954 Brown vs the Board | Based on 14th Amendment- ended segregation and overturned Plessey vs Fergusson | Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims 1962-4 | Based on the 14th Amendment- asserted the right of all votes to be of equal value- and lead to reapportionment across the USA. | Gideon v. Wainwright,1963  Miranda v. Arizona, 1966 | Right to legal representation and to be informed of rights. The ‘Miranda warning’ |  Engel v. Vitale 1962 | Outlawed school prayer. Based on First Amendment. | Griswold vs Connecticut | Found a ‘right of privacy ‘in the 14th Amendment | Warren’s successor Warren Burger 1969-1986 appointed by Nixon as a conservative, extended some of Warren’s precedents most famously Roe vs Wade used the precedent set by the Griswold case.  In Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971) the court upheld the policy of ‘bussing’ school children to create mixed race schools. The Warren/Burger courts were criticised by conservatives who claimed they attacked family values and up held the rights of criminals. Republican presidents began to have since sought to create a more conservative court ideally also activist, in order to overturn the Warren/Burger precedents. Have...

Words: 817 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Warren vs Rehnquist Courts

...In the sphere of criminal procedure and law enforcement, Chief Justice Earl Warren’s Court was associated with four chief cases: Terry v Ohio (1968), Miranda v Arizona (1966), Gideon v Wainwright (1963), and Mapp v Ohio (1961). These four cases establish the foundation for the application of the principle referred to as the ‘exclusionary rule’ and the major basis for Warren Court critics. The Warren Court established the doctrine of...

Words: 2153 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Mine

...Wainwright- right to an attorney Miranda v. Arizona- Miranda rights Engel v. Vitale and Abington School District v. Schempp- schools could not mandate or encourage prayer or Bible study Griswold v. Connecticut- states could not ban birth control- restricted right to privacy Cold War 1959- Castro takes over Cuba, turns communist, allied with Soviets- Khruschev Space Race- 1957- Sputnik launched, Yury Gagarin is first man in space-1961 Neil Armstrong- first man on the Moon-1969 Bay of Pigs- failed coup against Castro- Cuban rebels supported by US- complete failure, tension with Cuba-1961 Cuban Missile Crisis-1962- Soviets began installing long-range nuclear missiles in Cuba-capable of reaching US- Kennedy responded with a...

Words: 891 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Criminal Justice

...The next step after apprehending a suspect is to read this person their Miranda rights. This is very important as a suspect could be set, free later on at trial if this does not happen. Law Enforcment officers at any level must verbally inform an individual of their rights. These are the right to remain silent, warning that any answers can be used in a court of law, and the right to an attorney. This is a good thing because the person under arrest may not understand the right afforded to them and unfairly incriminate them self. These right are mainly the consequence of the U.S supreme court ruling in the case of Miranda vs Arizona. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966),This law was not universally accepted. Many police officers hated it. Ever since the Wickersham commission it was public knowledge that police used violence to coerce confessions. The courts understood police abuse of rights was not an isolated thing. Congress disliked the law and passed a law in 1968 to overrule it, 18 U.S.C.A. § 3501 (1985) No attorney generals enforced the provision and considered it unconstitutional. The...

Words: 2201 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Human Rights Analysis

...Constitutional Law: CRJS400 - 1402B - 01 Individual Project: Unit 3 Human Rights Analysis Human Rights Analysis The case of Plessy vs. Ferguson established the separate but equal doctrine that was prevalent throughout life in the South for over fifty years. The case involved a man by the name of Homer Adolph Plessy, who was a colored shoemaker from New Orleans, Louisiana. He was only 1/8 black and 7/8 white, but under Louisiana law he was considered black. It also involved a white Judge by the name of John Howard Ferguson. In 1892 Plessy was asked by the Citizens Committee which was a political group made up of African Americans and Creoles to help them challenge the Separate Car Act, which by Louisiana law separated blacks and whites in railroad cars. If a black was caught sitting in the white section of the cars, they could get either 20 days in jail or a $25 fine. He agreed to help the Committee. On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class ticket at the Press Street Station in New Orleans to go to Covington, Louisiana. The railroad didn’t support the Separate Car Law, because of the expense and trouble involved with it. They chose this station for that reason and the station was in on the test as well. He sat in the white only section and waited for the conductor. When the conductor arrived he told him that he was only 1/8 black and that he refused to move to the colored car of the train....

Words: 1022 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Judiciary Branch

...Fiction vs. Reality Jessica Nefedov University of Phoenix The United State’s judicial system is one that controls the everyday sentencing and hearing of cases. These cases range from civil matters, such as divorce, evictions, small claims and child custody to misdemeanors and felonies. Misdemeanors and felonies are criminal cases. Our Judicial system is made up of three branches of government; the Legislative branch which examines, debates and votes on bills, the Executive branch that initiates and administers the law, and the Judiciary branch, that we will be discussing in this paper. The Judiciary branch applies the law, as is seen in courtrooms across America and in homes on televisions. Television shows are popular for their dramatics, which increase their ratings. The more dramatic and action packed a show is, the more people tune in to watch it, therefore making it a successful show or series. In the world today popular crime shows such as Law & Order, CSI, Raising the Bar, and Peoples Court, show the dramatics of a case. Of these shows, Law and Order and Raising the Bar, both portray the legal drama and police procedures taken in a case. Upon watching an episode of Law & Order or Raising the Bar, one will see a lot of discrepancies of the fiction versus reality of today in the courtroom. It is important to remember that television shows are not real, unless stated so....

Words: 1371 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Pols 102

...Chapter 1 British Policy Incites a Rebellion - 1756-1763, Britain and France were in the Seven Years’ War, a conflict that had involved all major European powers. - Sugar Act (1764)- Including increase on taxes on imported goods such as molasses, coffee, and textiles. Monarchy: One person in charge. Very efficient, poor decisions. Oligarchy: Small group of people in charge. Can take form of a dictatorship. Nazi, Soviet Union (A junta: in charge of military small groups can also be a small group of religious leaders) Democracy: Power lies in the hand of the people. Basically a representative democracy, meaning we chose the people to make decisions. The dominant form of government today. Totalitarianism: The government was total control. Purpose is to implement the “utopian” society. Neg. side: They have to control everything, takes up a lot of resources. Gov. is inflexible, which leads to destruction of government. Authoritarianism: They don’t control everything, just enough. There isn’t a utopian vision. They control the military and the police. Only what they need to control. China is a midway point between Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism. Constitutionalism: A limited form of government. Powers are usually spelled out in a constitution that the government is obligated to follow. They are either being a democracy/monarchy. U.S is a democracy and England is a monarch. Hobbes: Claimed that we lived in a state of nature and not a good place to be. He believed......

Words: 1972 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Criminal Justice

...Page 1 Unit 1- Individual project Isabel Hernandez CRJS101 July 26th 2013 Guillermo Samudio Page 2 The local law enforcement agencies main purpose is to provide patrol, uphold the laws of the jurisdiction and to investigate local crimes. The local law enforcement includes differing agencies like the municipal (local police departments), county (local sheriff department), regional and tribal (local reservation police department) police that get there authority from the local government. The state law enforcement agencies main purpose is to do highway patrol and state wide investigations. State police aid the local police department with emergencies and investigations that are beyond the jurisdiction and resource boundaries of the local departments. Federal law enforcement agencies key role in place is to work with certain types of crimes. The FBI, the US marshals and Border Patrol are a few of the main agencies. FBI has eight major investigations. Counterterrorism (a prevention of terrorism by military or political actions), public corruption (the usage of public office for private gain), civil rights (citizens rights to social freedom, political and equality), counterintelligence (preventing sabotage, spying, intelligence gather by a foreign country or enemy), organized crime (illegal actions committed by groups or organizations of criminals such an example are mafia or gangs), major theft/violent crimes (Violent Crime include Bank Robbery,......

Words: 1100 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Ap U.S History

...Brooke Baker A.P US History Court Cases I. Marbury v. Madison a) Issue: i) Judicial v. Executive and Congressional Power ii) Judicial review/separation of powers b) Background: i) 1803 ii) In his last few hours in office, President John Adams made a series of “midnight appointments” to fill as many government posts as possible with Federalists. One of these appointments was William Marbury as a federal justice of the peace. However, Thomas Jefferson took over as President before the appointment was officially given to Marbury. Jefferson, a Republican, instructed Secretary of State James Madison to not deliver the appointment. Marbury sued Madison to get the appointment he felt he deserved. He asked the Court to issue a writ of mandamus, requiring Madison to deliver the appointment. The Judiciary Act, passed by Congress in 1789, permitted the Supreme Court of the United States to issue such a writ iii) Supreme Court must decide constitutionality of Judiciary Act c) Decision: i) John Marshall declares Judiciary Act unconstitutional ii) The Supreme Court has the right of judiciary review d) Significance: i) Impact of Marshall Court ii) Strengthened the judiciary in relation to other branches of government iii) Allows Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and declare laws unconstitutional II. McCulloch v. Maryland a) Issue: i) Supremacy v. State Rights...

Words: 5543 - Pages: 23