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 and sixth amendment rights were violated. They were violated because he was not told his rights when he was arrested, and they did not give him the right to a lawyer. (Miranda v. Arizona www.infoplease.com)
The majority opinion in this case was for Miranda, the majority opinion was wrote by Chief Justice Earl Warren. The Majority said that Miranda’s confession could not be used in court because the police had not informed Miranda of his rights to a attorney, and against self-incrimination, which are rights guaranteed to citizens of the United States by the fifth, and sixth amendments to the United States Constitution. The fifth amendment says that suspects of crimes have to be informed of their rights during an arrest including the right to remain silent. The sixth amendment says that people have to be informed of right to a fair hearing after the arrest. (Miranda v. Arizona www.kid.laws.com)
The majority opinion based their decision on that when Miranda was arrested he was not informed of his rights. One of Miranda's rights that were denied to him when he was arrested was that he has the right to consult with an attorney, if he would have known that he had the right to consult with an attorney, and that they could be present during his integration then his attorney might have encouraged him to not signed the confession, which would have maybe helped him a little bit even though the evidence was stacked against him and he was positively identified by the victim. If Miranda would have had an attorney he might have not self-incriminated himsel(Miranda v. Arizona www.infoplease.com)
The Majority also based their decision on that the confession that the law enforcement got from Miranda, the majority thought that the confession should not be used in court because at the time that they got the confession Miranda was not informed of his rights.(Miranda v. Arizona www.infoplease.com) Most people wanted Miranda to go to prison, but they also wanted a law or something made so that when people are arrested they are informed of their rights so they know what the right thing to do is and so they do not self-incriminate themselves.(Miranda v. Arizona www.kids.laws.com)
The dissenting opinion based their decision on the fact that they thought that “the decision of the court represents poor constitutional law and entails harmful consequences for the country at large.” (Miranda v. Arizona www.streetlaw.com) They also thought that it was not fine how they got the confession, but he confessed that he did them so why...

Find Another Essay On Miranda v. Arizona

The Miranda Decision Essay

1769 words - 7 pages The Miranda Decision In 1966, the U. S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda decision was a departure from the established law in the area of police interrogation. Prior to Miranda, a confession would be suppressed only if a court determined it resulted from some actual coercion, threat, or promise. The Miranda decision was intended to protect suspects of their 5th Amendment right of no

Miranda Rights Essay

746 words - 3 pages lawyer's advice and he was convicted and sentenced. Three years later Miranda's appeal reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The court had made its decision to make procedural requirements that the law enforcement must follow, which overturned Miranda's conviction. Miranda v. Arizona caused a list, which the police must deliver to criminal suspects in the process of being questioned. Miranda was tried again and convicted. The prosecution team

Miranda Vs. Arizona. The Supreme Court decision detailed the principles governing police interrogation: The Miranda Rights.

1505 words - 6 pages principles governing police interrogation specifying that police officers have to make certain points clear for the accused before the accused is interrogated. Specifically, before any pertinent questioning of a suspect is done, police are required to recite the Miranda Rights. "Beginning with the 1966 Supreme Court decision in Miranda v. Arizona, law enforcement has endured three decades of court-imposed restraints on its ability to engage in

Suspects Need Their Miranda Rights

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

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 In 1963, an 18-year-old woman was kidnapped and raped in Phoenix, Arizona. The police investigated the case, (Miranda vs. the State of Arizona), and arrested Ernesto Miranda, a mentally unstable man. Miranda, who was 23-years-old at the time of his arrest, confessed that he had kidnapped and raped the woman. By confessing to the crime, Miranda was convicted of kidnapping and rape. However, when Miranda was arrested he was not advised of his


1713 words - 7 pages      Miranda Warnings      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 speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during police questioning, if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you by the state. These words have preceded every arrest since Miranda v. Arizona 1966, informing

Silence is Golden

1263 words - 5 pages interviews, about evidence, witnesses, or facts. Amazingly suspects still waive their rights, often to their dismay. Before 1966, police interrogation included intimidating and coercive methods sometimes referred to as the ‘third degree’. Today, we have protection from intimidation towards confession; we have what is called the Miranda Warning. The Miranda Warning got its name from a criminal case trial on June 13, 1966. Miranda v. Arizona was a

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

The Warren Court

2391 words - 10 pages American criminal justice system into a new era with a change in the way that criminal investigations was conducted. The four cases that had the biggest impact in criminal investigation were Mapp v. Ohio, Terry v. Ohio, Escobedo v. Illinois, and Miranda v. Arizona. The Fourth Amendment guarantees protection against unreasonable search and seizure. However, the courts have decided that in order to protect citizens, evidence seized

Rosenberg, Epp, and Miranda: Implementation of Supreme Court Decisions

2979 words - 12 pages Miranda v. Arizona (1966). This decision has been the subject of many articles and books. It has also been popularized through various television shows involving police (Law & Order for example). Not only is the Miranda decision well known, it has also been highly controversial. “In its immediate aftermath, the Miranda opinion was assailed by police, prosecutors, politicians, and the media” (Leo 622). Given the controversy, amount of

Miranda Rights

1328 words - 5 pages was used in court against him. Miranda was undoubtedly found guilty.      Miranda v Arizona went all the way to the Supreme Court. There the Supreme Court ruled that the police do have a responsibility to inform a subject of an interrogation of their constitutional rights. The constitutional rights have to do with self-incrimination, and the right to counsel before, during and after questioning.      What does this mean to you? Well if

Similar Essays

Miranda V. Arizona Essay

943 words - 4 pages James wells Wells 1History 1302Irigoyen26 March 2014Miranda v. ArizonaIn March 1963, a man names Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix Arizona, with the belief that he raped an 18 year old female. He was heavily questioned and interrogated, during this time he had admitted to committing the crime and gave a written statement which he signed; he went as far as to identify the girl that he had raped. He wrote in his statement that he was not

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

The Right To Appointed Counsel In Decisions Of The United States Supreme Court Prior To Miranda V. Arizona (1966)

1804 words - 7 pages The right to appointed counsel in decisions of the United States Supreme Court prior to Miranda v. Arizona (1966) From the Judiciary Act to incorporation doctrine In the landmark decision Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the US Supreme Court stated in the name of Chief Justice Earl Warren that “…He [accused] has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning

Miranda Rights Essay

1521 words - 6 pages , 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