Miranda V. Arizona Court Case Summary

Words: 804

Pages: 4

Open Document

The case was first tried to a jury in Arizona's Maricopa County Superior Court where the defendant, Ernesto Miranda, was convicted of rape and kidnapping. Miranda appealed the conviction to the Supreme Court of Arizona which affirmed the trial court conviction finding that Miranda's constitutional rights had been violated. Miranda then petitioned for the case to be heard by the United States Supreme Court who accepted to hear the case during their spring 1966. Oral arguments for the case were heard on February 28, March 1and March 2, 1966. The Court issued its decision on June 13, 1966. In early March 1963, the rape and kidnapping of a young woman was reported to the Phoenix Police Department. Based on statements from the victim and witnesses, …show more content…
According to the Court's holding, even though the written confession stated that Miranda had known his rights and waived them the facts of the case showed that his waiver of those rights did not satisfy constitutional standards. While the Court left open the specific safeguards the state can implement to demonstrate they had not violated the defendant's right, the Fifth Amendment required, at a minimum, that prior to interrogation, a defendant must be informed of his right to remain silent and that anything he says can be used against him. The Court also held that a defendant's privilege against self-incrimination also included the right to consult an attorney and have an attorney present during an interrogation. The presence of an attorney, according to the Court, was needed to make sure that a defendant though informed of his rights could still be coerced, bullied or intimidated by the police or a prosecutor to give up his

Miranda V. Arizona Court Case Summary

The Miranda v. Arizona court case that occurred during 1966 was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court. The case first began in 1963 with the arrest of resident Ernesto Miranda by the Phoenix Police Department. He was accused of raping, kidnapping, and robbing. During the two hour interrogation, he confessed to the crimes. However, Miranda was not informed of his rights before the police interrogation. He was not informed of his fifth and sixth amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment…

Words 598 - Pages 3

Arguments Against The Grand Jury Amendment

accused are considered innocent until proven guilty. Some of the enumerated rights concerning the accused are; Article IV, protection against unreasonable search and seizure, and protection against the issuing of warrants without probable cause. Article V, commonly called the grand jury amendment. Article VI, the right to a speedy and public trial, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have the required process for obtaining witnesses…

Words 477 - Pages 2

Miranda Project

CCJS234 Miranda Memo Project April 4th, 2011 To: Clifford Stoddard Date: April 4th, 2011 RE: John Smith Murder Charges Question Presented: When a police officer intimidates a suspect after the suspect refused to talk and asked for counsel was his Fifth Amendment right violated? Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S 477 (1981), a suspect who has invoked his rights to remain silent cannot later waive that right unless he initiates the conversation and does so knowingly and…

Words 902 - Pages 4

Miranda Rights Essays

Miranda Rights I am going to be discussing the Miranda rights. What they mean to you to me and you, what they entitle you to, and how they came to be implemented in law enforcement today. I am interested in this topic because as a United States citizen like many others, everyone should know their rights and protections of those rights. Miranda can be very difficult to understand to many. It is important to have a general sense of understanding about these rights because if they are not read properly…

Words 1353 - Pages 6