Miranda v. Arizona Bashlor, 1
Miranda v. Arizona: Rights of the Accused
Lauren Bashlor
Liberty High School
AP Government 3AB
The U.S. Supreme Court?s compromise in the Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court case referred to three different court cases aside from Miranda v. Arizona case. Each of the three different court cases involved the rights of the accused individuals (U.S Courts, 2015a). Miranda v. Arizona court case dealt with an individual being accused of kidnapping and raping a young woman. Miranda had been questioned and interrogated by the police, he also confessed and signed a written confession during the interrogation, without being read his rights and especially his right to a lawyer and if he could not afford one then one would be given to him (U.S Courts, 2015b). Miranda v. Arizona established that an individual being accused of a crime has the right to remain silent and anything you say can be used against you in the court of law.
Ernesto Miranda was born in Mexico but residing in the state of Arizona, he was accused and found guilty of kidnapping and raping a young woman; he was arrested and questioned by the police without them even stating his rights as an accused
…show more content…
Arizona case is an important case that deals with Miranda given a confession without being stated his rights to him in a way that he could understand them. Miranda was one of many accused individuals that gave a statement without having his rights being read to him. The U.S. Supreme Court set aside Miranda?s confession because it was inquired through an improper interrogation. Arizona retried Miranda, and the confession was not listed as evidence against him, but his wife gave a statement only after he sued for the custody of his daughter. Then he was sentenced to twenty to thirty years in prison. On January 31, 1976, Miranda was released from prison, there was a violent bar fight, and he received a stab womb and pronounced dead at the