Miranda Rights Essay

1521 words - 6 pages

Everyone has heard the term "Miranda Rights", whether that be when taking a law class, during the course of a television show, or perhaps through personal experience with their use. What do these two words really mean? Where did they come from and how do they apply to an individual's everyday life? The answers to this question are neither simple nor fully answered today, as challenges to Miranda Rights appear in courtrooms routinely. However, the basis for Miranda Rights can be traced back to a landmark case handed down from the Supreme Court of the United States in 1965 entitled Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda was an immigrant from Mexico living in the Phoenix, Arizona area in 1963 when he was accused of kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman. The victim picked Miranda out of a lineup and he was subsequently interrogated for two hours during which the police investigators failed to advise him of either his Fifth Amendment Right against self incrimination or his Sixth Amendment Right to request the assistance of an attorney. Over the course of this interrogation, Ernesto Miranda confessed and signed a written confession of his crimes. Included in his confession was acknowledgement that he had waived his right against self-incrimination. After his conviction based on his confession, Miranda's attorney appealed his sentence on the basis that his confession should be excluded because Miranda had not been informed of his rights by the interrogators. The police officers involved offered the defense that because Miranda had a past conviction, he should have been well aware of his rights. The Arizona Supreme Court denied Miranda's appeal, and his conviction was upheld. Miranda's attorney then appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court in 1965, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The Miranda v Arizona case was combined with three other similar cases. When the Supreme Court handed down the decision 5-4 in Miranda's favor, the resulting rights afforded to those being questioned or detained by police became popularly known as Miranda Rights. Miranda Rights must include the following as described by Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren:1. You have the right to remain silent.2. Anything you say can and will be held against you in a court of law.3. You have the right to an attorney.4. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.Miranda Rights are meant to be read to those being detained by police prior to an interrogation about a crime, or when a suspect is taken into custody. A police officer must be careful in the order in which they question the suspect and read the suspect his or her rights. If care is not given to this, the case could turn out in similar fashion to the decision of Fellers v U.S. Two police officers went to the home of John J. Fellers to arrest Fellers because of an indictment for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. The officers relayed to Fellers that they wanted to discuss his...

Find Another Essay On Miranda Rights

The Difference between the Miranda Rights and the Charter of Rights

1224 words - 5 pages investigators that you have nothing to say (Friedman, 2014). "You have the right to ... not much: Why are there no 'Miranda rights' in our country ?", is an article by Solomon Friedman that explains this is not the case in Canada, and asks the question, Why not? Missing from this article is an explanation of what Miranda rights are, and how are they different from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Miranda rights, also known as the

Miranda v. Arizona Essay

1206 words - 5 pages Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark case because now almost everybody knows about this case because of the Miranda Rights that were a direct result of this case, and the Supreme Court’s ruling. The Supreme Courts ruling that it was against Miranda’s rights, then because of this decision they made the Miranda Rights. The Supreme Court was correct in the ruling of Miranda v. Arizona, which they ruled in favor of Ernesto Miranda because his fifth

The Miranda Decision

1769 words - 7 pages self-incrimination. The verdict of Miranda v. Arizona is an efficient way of informing criminal suspects of their rights established by the Constitution, allowing un-Constitutional confessions to be nullinvoid in the court of law. However, it does not enforce it well enough. For example, a statement taken in violation of Miranda can be used for impeachment purposes and deciding whether evidence derived from a Miranda violation is

Miranda v. Arizona case: How it changed law enforcement

1577 words - 6 pages The "Miranda rule," which makes a confession inadmissible in a criminal trial if the accused was not properly advised of his rights, has been so thoroughly integrated into the justice system that any child who watches television can recite the words: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney" Yet the 1966 Supreme Court ruling in Miranda v. Arizona

Discuss the ways in which your engagement with the construction of a character or characters in "The Collector" has contributed to your understanding of the text.

2238 words - 9 pages to Miranda is 'within his rights', he realises that his actions would have concequences in society. Clegg's point of view is not seen as a reliable source by the reader because Clegg is ultimately insane and there is a possibility that he may change his side of the story. It is possible to see through Miranda's point of view that she is of a higher class than Clegg, and thinks like this too. She believes in beauty being created instead of being

Miranda V. Arizona

943 words - 4 pages had an attorney.The plaintiff was denied his rights to remain silent until proven guilty and he had no knowledge of the right to an attorney. While, the defendant states that he had enough legal evidence to lead to conviction or Mr. Miranda. The court is concerned with the fact that the plaintiff did not have his legal rights stated to him which violates his right to the fifth and the fourteenth amendment. This case of Miranda V. Arizona brings

Miranda vs. Arizona

600 words - 2 pages Miranda vs. Arizona:      This case had to do with an Ernest Miranda who raped a Patty McGee*. After extracting a written confession from the rapist about the situation, Miranda’s lawyer argued that it was not valid since the Phoenix Police Department failed to read Miranda his rights, also in violation of the Sixth Amendment which is the right to counsel. Some factors that helped support Miranda’s arguments were that

How the Miranda vs. Arizona case spurred the Supreme Court to specifically outline the necessary aspects of police warnings to suspects.

1215 words - 5 pages interrogation. Furthermore, it was decided that police officers have to make certain points clear before questioning the suspect.The Miranda case solely dealt with the first ten Amendments, or the "bill of rights" amendments. These rights are intended to ensure that everyone has the right to due process of the law that states that a person's rights, liberty, and property cannot be violated without a proper trial. If any of the five points listed in the

Silence is Golden

1263 words - 5 pages innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker’s own mouth”. (Ohio v. Reiner) It is common knowledge that officers are required by law to read a person’s Miranda rights before questioning. By contrast, not many people realize police officers are allowed, by law, to lie to suspects. Police are routinely encouraged by district attorneys to fabricate information during

Anti-Colonialism in Shakespeare´s The Tempest Play

903 words - 4 pages Anti-Colonialism in Shakespeare’s The Tempest Play Through The Tempest play, William Shakespeare weaves together a tale that is characterized by anti-colonialist sentiments. Prospero - the deposed Milan Duke - adopts a colonialist mentality by treating his colleagues as slaves who have no rights. Characters who suffer mistreatment under Prospero include: Ariel - the spirit creature; Ferdinand - the Naples Prince; and Caliban - Sycorax’s son

The case, Miranda vs. Arizona

810 words - 3 pages -1-Of all the cases in the Supreme Court there seem to be some that just more people seem to talk about as having a big part in American history. One of these court cases I feel would have to be the Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436.Ernesto Arthur Miranda was arrested in his home of Phoenix, Arizona in the year 1966. He was accused of kidnaping and raping a Phoenix, Arizona, woman. Apparently when he was arrested he had not read his rights given

Similar Essays

Miranda Rights Essay

746 words - 3 pages Miranda Rights The Miranda rights all started in 1963. Ernest Miranda was taken into custody by Phoenix police as a suspect for the kidnapping and rape of a girl. The Phoenix police department questioned Ernest for two vigorous hours. Miranda finally confessed orally to the crime, and then wrote out a statement admitting to the crime and describing what he had done. Miranda's trial came to date; the crime was admitted despite his

Miranda Rights Essay

1328 words - 5 pages Miranda Rights      In this paper I am going to be discussing the Miranda rights. What they mean to you, what they entitle you to, and how they came to be used in law enforcement today. I am discussing this topic because, one it is useful to me as a police officer, two they can be very difficult to understand, and three if they are not read properly to you when you are placed under an arrest it could actually get you off. I will start off

Suspects Need Their Miranda Rights Essay

1744 words - 7 pages of the Miranda rights were announced by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona. Miranda v. Arizona, announced June, 13 1966, resolved four separate criminal appeals concerning the role of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution in police interrogations of criminal suspects. An Arizona jury convicted Ernesto Miranda of kidnapping and rape after he signed a confession to the Phoenix detectives. Without a lawyer present, he was questioned

Miranda Vs. Arizona. The Supreme Court Decision Detailed The Principles Governing Police Interrogation: The Miranda Rights.

1505 words - 6 pages "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."- PlatoThe Miranda rule, which makes a confession inadmissible in a criminal trial if the accused was not properly advised of his rights, has been so thoroughly integrated into the justice system that any person who watches television can recite the words: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used