This website uses cookies to ensure you have the best experience. Learn more

The Fifth Amendment And Miranda V. Arizona

1781 words - 8 pages

“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...this is what you hear on all your favorite cop shows. But, where did this saying come from? In 1963 Ernesto Miranda a ninth grade dropout (PBS) was arrested and charged with kidnaping, rape, and armed robbery. The police interrogated him for two hours. During the question Miranda supposedly admitted to all the crimes. The police then used Miranda’s confession to convict him in court. While in prison Miranda appealed his case and eventually brought it to the Supreme Court. The court ruled five to four in favor of Miranda. The Supreme Court was correct in their ruling of Miranda v. Arizona, because the majority opinion correctly argued the fifth and sixth amendments. The dissenting opinion arguments regarding the fifth and sixth amendments were incorrect and in other cases involving due process this amendment was abused. In similar cases the court ruled in favor of the defendant because he was harmed during the interrogation process.
The court argued that the case was not about whether Miranda was guilty of the charges or not (he obviously confessed). Rather they argued that the case was about the way in which the interrogation was derived. The court’s ruling was meant to deal with the mistreatment of suspects by policemen during interrogation. Policemen are notorious for mistreating suspects in questioning (alovardohistory). Prior to this case a possible witness was beaten, kicked, and was burned on the back with lighted cigarette butts just in order to extract a testimony. The Supreme Court determined that the accused must be read the following rights: “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. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?” (wikipedia) The reason these warnings should be issued to the suspect is for legal protection and for the safety of the accused. These rights are derived directly from the constitution. While it doesn't say exactly that, it is what the Justices determined it meant, which is their job according to the constitution.
Ernesto Miranda’s written confession included a signed statement saying that he had a full understanding of his fifth amendment rights. Miranda argued that he was never told his rights nor did he understand them. In the fifth amendment of the United States constitution it says that an accused person cannot be forced to witness against their self, also the sixth amendment states that the accused shall have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Miranda claimed that he neither knew his fifth amendment right to remain silent or his right to have a lawyer present during questioning. He argued that a suspect who didn’t have any prior...

Find Another Essay On The Fifth Amendment and Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda V. Arizona Essay

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 V Arizona Essay

1002 words - 5 pages stated to them correctly. This was a “hazardous” experiment which could have a dismal outcome and prove to be very ineffective in the future. Furthermore, the dissenting opinion on the way the police officers had treated suspects amendment rights were “exaggerated” and that the outcome was only to favor the accused more favorably. Our Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights have changed since the Miranda v. Arizona case got brought to the attention of the Supreme Court.

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

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 Fifth Amendment

973 words - 4 pages the rights of United States citizens against government prosecution. Introduced to the Bill of Rights in 1789, the Fifth Amendment is a noteworthy amendment both during the past and in today’s world. The Fifth Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, was proposed by James Madison, providing a way for the Founding Fathers of the United States to better protect the basic rights of people. Congress thought this amendment was necessary

The Fifth Amendment

865 words - 4 pages If one witnesses a murder while attempting to steal a stop sign and is asked by a police official whether or not he or she committed the murder, the witness has the right to not say anything in order to protect him or herself from self-incrimination, a clause in the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment upholds the rights of United States citizens against government prosecution. Introduced to the Bill of Rights in 1789, the Fifth

Miranda Vs Arizona; Rights and Responsibility

866 words - 4 pages conviction was overturned. Now not only did people actually have the rights that were written in our Constitution. But also, now the police officers had the responsibility to actually read you those rights and make sure you understood you had those rights. If they do not read you your Miranda rights at the time of arrest, you may actually fight it in the court of law. Work Cited McBride, Alex, “Miranda V. Arizona (1966).” “Facts and Case Summary” U.S.Courts.gov (What are your Miranda Rights? , web, 2009).

Fifth Amendment and Double Jeopardy

1651 words - 7 pages was only sentenced five to twenty years imprisonment. Green's second trial for first degree murder placed him in jeopardy twice for the same offense in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and the conviction was reversed to secure Green's rights under the U.S. Constitution. The Crist v. Bretz (1978) case involves the federal rule of ruling the time when jeopardy attaches in a jury trial is binding on Montana through the Fourteenth Amendment

Mapp v. Ohio and the Fourth Amendment

918 words - 4 pages , and persons or things to be seized (Worral, 2012). In other words such amendment gave significance to two legal concepts the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures and the obligation to provide probable cause to issue a warrant. This leads to the introduction of the landmark Supreme Court case Mapp v. Ohio and the connection to a fact pattern (similar case). Both cases will be analyzed showing the importance of facts and arguments

The Arizona v. Fulminante Case

1769 words - 7 pages and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Paramount to consider is the fact that the use of a forced confession is similar to the use of flawed information. The Arizona v. Fulminante case encompassed an excessive amount of debate regarding the coerced confessions stated by Oreste Fulminante. When Fulminante reported his stepdaughter Jeneane Fulminante, to be missing on September 14, 1982, Jeneane’s dead body was located in the desert east of

Similar Essays

The Fifth Amendment And Miranda V. Arizona

1918 words - 8 pages all the crimes. The police then used Miranda’s confession to convict him in court. While in prison Miranda appealed his case and eventually brought it to the Supreme Court. The court ruled five to four in favor of Miranda. The Supreme Court was correct in their ruling of Miranda v. Arizona, because the majority opinion correctly argued the fifth and sixth amendments. The dissenting opinion arguments regarding the fifth and sixth amendments were

Miranda Rule And The Fifth Amendment Rights

1990 words - 8 pages charged with the rape and kidnapping. The Supreme Court affirmed the case. The legal issue is whether the law enforcement is required to deprive the arrested criminals of their Fifth Amendment constitutional rights against self – incrimination before they are being interrogated. The Supreme Court held that incriminating statements made by the suspected are only admissible if their Miranda rights has been read to them. It is important that upon

Miranda V. Arizona Essay

1206 words - 5 pages 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

Miranda V. Arizona Essay

1293 words - 6 pages Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate himself. He was also not informed of his Sixth Amendment right to have the assistance of an attorney. In the first part of his interrogation, Miranda denied having any involvement in the crime, but after two hours he confessed to the crime in writing. (Street Law) Miranda went to Arizona local court where it was decided that he would be sentenced to twenty to thirty years in jail. (Gitlin) In jail