ipl-logo

Case Brief Miranda Vs Arizona

688 Words3 Pages

Case Citation: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
Parties: Ernesto Miranda, Plaintiff/ Appellant State of Arizona, Defendant/ Appellee
Facts: This case represents the consolidation of four different cases, in which an accused individual confessed to a crime after being subjected to a variety of interrogation techniques without being informed of his Fifth Amendment rights during the interrogation. The first case resolved Ernesto Miranda who was arrested and charged with kidnap and rape. He confesses and signed a written statement after a two-hour interrogation. Miranda never receive notice of his rights.
The second case involved an individual named Michael Vignera who was arrested for robbery. Mr. Vignera orally confessed to officers …show more content…

Upon arrival Miranda was identified by the victim and subjected to two hours of interrogation. Upon the completion of the interrogation Miranda made an oral confession and signed a written statement. The statement signed by Miranda stated that the confession obtained was done so voluntarily and with full knowledge of his constitutional rights. At trial Miranda's confession was admitted as evidence. Miranda was convicted of rape and kidnapping. Miranda appealed to the Supreme Court of Arizona, stating his confession should have been inadmissible during the original trial, due to fact he had not been informed of his Fifth Amendment rights. The Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed the lower court's …show more content…

Decision: Three court cases revered, and one court case affirmed. The court reviewed the writ dealing with the Fifth Amendment and suspects rights during interrogation. In order for a confession to be admissible in court a suspect must be advised of their constitutional rights.
Comments: Miranda v. Arizona is considered to be a landmark court case. Its final decision came down to a 5-4 majority vote in favor of the suspects. Also, it is important to note that the reason the case is cited as being Miranda v. Arizona is because it was the first on the docket. This case involved all of the following cases: 1) No. 759. Miranda v. Arizona, 2) No. 760 Vignera v. New York, 3) No. 761, Westover v. United States, and 4) No. 584, California v. Stewart. It is listed as Miranda v. Arizona because it was listed first on the

Show More
Related

Summary Of Miranda V Arizona 384 US 436

529 Words | 3 Pages

Can the confession Miranda gave be used in trial against him? In a 5-4 decision, the court determined that in order for an interrogation and the statements made on behalf of the defendant to be considered as evidence, and in order to protect the accused, the accused needs to be aware of the fact that he/she has the right to an attorney, aware of self incrimination, and will need to voluntarily give up their right to these things if they choose to do so. In this case it was decided that it was not acceptable to use the confession Miranda made against him, and his rights were violated. If any of these criteria are not met, any statements made during an interrogation cannot be used against the defendant, otherwise their rights would be violated. This case is very significant because it changed the way officers perform their duties, and all accused must be read their miranda

Read More

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

1528 Words | 7 Pages

After the written confession was introduced as evidence and tried in the court case. Miranda’s case then appealed to the Supreme Court, where he stated that he would have never confessed if he would have been read his rights, and given an attorney like he asked. He didn’t argue that his confession was false or coerced, but he did argue that his rights were not read and request for an attorney was denied multiple times. (Greenwood, 5.5) Lawyers from Arizona then proceeded to say that he had not requested for a lawyer nor did he attempt when being interrogated. They also added to that by saying his confession was freely given.

Read More

Why Was Salinas Silence A True Exercise Of The Fifth Amendment?

1407 Words | 6 Pages

The lower court’s judgment is affirmed. Reasoning: Certiorari was granted in the United States Supreme Court to resolve an appealed ruling from the lower courts to decide if a prosecutor may use a defendant’s silence as a claim against self-incrimination during a noncustodial police interview. As the petitioner did not verbally invoke the privilege of self-incrimination, it was found unnecessary to answer this specific claim, as the Fifth Amendment is a privilege against self-incrimination that should be expressly invoked by the defendant who desires the protection by claiming

Read More

Analysis Of The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona Bashlor

1193 Words | 5 Pages

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.

Read More

Miranda V. Arizona Case Brief

870 Words | 4 Pages

The party of Arizona argued that his rights had never been violated, thus making his confession valid. They stated that, Miranda had signed off on the confession, therefore he was fully aware of his rights and decided to wave them. I believe that the most persuasive point made in this case is the fact that you cannot use information obtained by not informing a person of their constitutional rights in trial because if it weren’t for their lack of awareness they may not have received the intel in the first

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona Dbq

528 Words | 3 Pages

The Card informs, “You have the right to consult with a lawyer and have him present with you while you are being questioned” (Document J). In this case, Miranda argues that he was not aware of his right to an attorney, creating him to easily confess. The court argues that if would have been aware of these rights, perhaps he would not have confessed or feel “compelled” to make a statement immediately. When being arrested, the thought of legal counciltation might not even render through ones read. If Miranda had had a lawyer present, he would be informed that he did not need to make a statement and would not “blurt” his confession (Docutment H).

Read More

Dbq Miranda Essay

1163 Words | 5 Pages

In this case, those tactics were pushed to the extreme. The interrogators showed complete dominance in order for Miranda to confess. The Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation declares, “He must dominate his subject and overwhelm him with his inexorable will to obtain the truth” (Document F). In this examination, the rudiments of investigations over-stepped their “dominance” and nearly forced a confession. The accused must be informed of their rights to avoid this mistreatment, otherwise the person suspected is practically compelled to speak, even though they might not do so normally (Document G).

Read More

Miranda Warning Dbq

883 Words | 4 Pages

The Miranda warning was established to fully complete the legal promise of self-incrimination

Read More

Ernesto Miranda's Fifth And Sixth Amendment Rights

696 Words | 3 Pages

Arizona was brought to the United States Supreme Court in 1966. The argument for the defense was that Miranda’s Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and Sixth Amendment Right to legal counsel were evidently violated. The State of Arizona ignored the Escobedo rule, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1964, which states that a statement form a detained suspect in police custody is inadmissible in a court of law unless if the detained suspect is warned of the right to remain silent or the right to an opportunity to have an attorney present, and The Gideon rule, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1963, which permits all suspects of felony the right to an attorney. Inclusive with these violations, Miranda’s confession was obtained illegally and should be dismissed. The verdict was inequitable, and Miranda should receive a new trial.

Read More

Fifth Amendment Pros And Cons

814 Words | 4 Pages

Arizona. The case gained national exposure when Miranda was taken into police custody and questioned for two hours and then signed a written confession stating that he had kidnapped and raped women. Miranda was taken into court and convicted of multiple accounts and was sentenced to multiple years in prison. Miranda appealed under the argument that Miranda’s fifth amendment rights were violated. The case eventually went to the Arizona supreme court, which ruled that none of Miranda 's rights were violated.

Read More

Miranda Interrogation Case Study

101 Words | 1 Pages

Moreover, Miranda applies only during “custodial interrogations.” “Custodial” in this case means either: (1) after they have been taken into police custody “Whether they are considered “in custody” depends on “how a reasonable man in the suspect 's position would have understood his situation.” Or (2) when they have been deprived of their freedom of movement. “Interrogation” can be either: (1) direct questioning by the police; or (2) the “functional equivalent” of direct questioning. It is considered interrogation whenever the police say or do something to them that they should know is probable to cause them to confess or say something incriminating.

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

890 Words | 4 Pages

Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote this : “The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he has the right to remain silent, and that anything he says will be used against him in court; he must be clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation, and that, if he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.” The court set aside his conviction. After a second trial, Miranda 's confession from the previous trial were thrown out. However he was convicted again and was sentenced up to thirty years in federal prison. Once he was released on probation, a violent fight broke out at a local Phoenix, Arizona bar which left a lethal knife wound which killed him.

Read More

What Miranda Rights Mean To Me

700 Words | 3 Pages

When the police are asking questions i think the people should have the right to have a lawyer present and the reason to having a lawyer present is to protect you and the lawyer can make the police to stop asking me or anyone questions the lawyer also fights for you in court and if the lawyer is good then you could possibly be set free. that 's why the people of our country should know are constitutional rights, that 's why miranda got arrested in the first place is he didn 't know anything about our rights and he set there and let that cop make him confess and the bad part about all of this is the cop knew the rights but chose not to read them to him,i thank 9f miranda would have known his rights that cop wouldn 't have been able to set there and just keep

Read More

Persuasive Essay On Miranda Rights

1139 Words | 5 Pages

Miranda stating that Miranda's Sixth Amendment right to counsel had been violated by the Phoenix Police Department, because there was not a lawyer present when he was being interrogated. The sixth amendment states, “ the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. It has been most visibly tested in a series of cases involving terrorism, but much more often figures in cases that involve for jury selection or the protection of witnesses, including victims of sex crimes as well as witnesses in need of protection from retaliation” (Sixth Amendment). Two weeks after the state of Arizona responded by stating that Miranda's rights had not been violated, When he was being interrogated and gave his full confession, he signed the form saying he understood his rights ("Ernesto

Read More

Essay On Miranda Law

799 Words | 4 Pages

Following are the issues, which were focused in that scenario. Issues related to Miranda Law 1. People Do not know about their rights: As in this case, the family and

Read More

More about Case Brief Miranda Vs Arizona

Related Topics

Open Document