ipl-logo

Case Study On Miranda Vs Arizona

1407 Words6 Pages

Landmark Supreme Court Case – Miranda v. Arizona As stated in the Fourteenth Amendment, “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (School). Police officers work non-stop, around the clock to only detain, arrest, and covict criminals. The restrictions of abusing victims rights have been part of the United States since the Bill of Rights but this view changed in the 1960s. Due to the fact that crime was rising in the 1960s, public satefy was becoming more of a concern so officers needed a method to reduce crime in the public. Poilice officers decided to treat suspects harsher in hope to reduce crimes. They treated the suspects harsher while they were in custody, such as the interrogation process …show more content…

In hope to help find the person who raped her that night, the victim told her numerous people, including her brother the description of the vehicle that night she was raped. Eleven days after the investigation, her brother spotted a truck that had the exact same description as what the victim described that night the victim was raped. The truck belonged to a man named Ernesto Miranda. After that, the Phoenix police located Ernesto Miranda at his home, arrested him, and took him down the police station. As of right now, the Phoenix police only have the evidence of Ernesto Miranda being owner of the truck that was described. The police place him in a lineup to have the victim identify who he was but she was unable to. Even though she was not able to identify him, police still had his description of his truck which led him to the police station anyways so they proceeded to interrogate him to see if they could …show more content…

In summary, the Sixth Amendment described that an individual must have personal liberties to have a fair trial after they are in custody. The decision made by the Supreme came down to a five-four vote favoring with Miranda. After the whole process of appealing and ending up on top, the reward is getting a retrial, this time, without the evidence of the confession paper. Due to the other solid evidence they had against Miranda besides the confession paper, Miranda was still found guilty. With Miranda’s case making it all the way to the Supreme Court, it still has a huge impact our legal system as of

Open Document