ipl-logo

Ernesto Miranda Case Study

835 Words4 Pages

Ernesto Miranda was arrested for a rape, robbery and kidnaping charge, after the victim had pointed him out in a line up. Although he had allegedly admitted to the crime, he was not made aware of his rights. Miranda hadn’t finished the ninth grade, and had a history of mental instability had no counsel present during that time. His prosecution relied solely on his confession, and he was convicted, the court gave him 20 to 30 years in prison. He had appealed to the Arizona court, claiming that the police had gotten his confession unconstitutionally. However; the court disagreed and withheld Miranda’s sentence, but reviewed the case again in 1966.

The supreme court by a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled …show more content…

This and other forms of intimidation, kept by the Court, stripped criminal suspects of their basic liberties and often times lead to false confessions. The defendant's right to an attorney is an equally fundamental right. Mainly because the presence of an attorney in interrogations, according to Chief Justice Warren, enables "the defendant under otherwise compelling circumstances to tell his story without fear, effectively, and in a way that eliminates the evils in the interrogations process." If it wasn’t for these two fundamental rights, in which the Court ruled, "dispel the compulsion inherent in custodial surroundings," "no statement obtained from the defendant can truly be the product of his free …show more content…

These mandatory "Miranda Rights" begin with "the right to remain silent," and continue with the statement that "anything said can and will be used against [the defendant] in a court of law." It goes on to say that "anything said can and will be used against [the defendant] in a court of law." The police are then told to inform the suspect of his or her right to an attorney and allow for (or, if necessary, provide for) a defendant's attorney who can accompany him during interrogations.

However; none of these rights was afforded to Ernesto Miranda and his "confession" was thus unconstitutionally admitted at trial, his conviction was reversed. Miranda was later retried and convicted without the admission of his confession. Miranda v. Arizona, created the "Miranda Rights" we misuse today. It was in a way backlash at the increasing police powers of the state with the basic rights of individuals. Miranda remains good helper of the law

Show More
Related

Miranda's Confession, Injustice In Pheonix, Arizona

364 Words | 2 Pages

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Pheonix, Arizona for the kidnapping and raping of a woman. When questioned by police officers, Miranda would eventually give a confession, and sign it, which wasn 't the case.. Before the court, this confession would be used against Miranda, and with it, the implication that it was received voluntarily and with the convicted knowing his rights. Miranda was convicted with a 20-30 year sentence. Upon eventually learning that his confession was obtained unlawfully, Miranda would appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking for an overturn, and when that fell through, would turn to the United States Supreme Court, filing a habeas corpus.

Read More

Case Brief Miranda Vs Arizona

688 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More

Arturo Miranda Research Papers

667 Words | 3 Pages

In addition, Arizona claimed that Miranda signed the confession willingly and his conviction was based off Arizona law. Arizona claimed the Supreme Court should uphold its conviction and should not downgrade the work from the

Read More

Summary Of Miranda Vs Arizona Case Brief

531 Words | 3 Pages

Case Brief Case: Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Facts: The Miranda warning, which informs criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to an attorney while they are in police custody or being questioned in a detention facility, was created by the landmark Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966). It was brought by Ernesto Miranda, who was detained under the charges of rape, kidnapping and robbery. He wasn't told of his right to an attorney or the right to remain silent before being questioned by the police, so Miranda admitted to the crimes while being interviewed. The confession was admitted into evidence during the trial, and Miranda was found guilty. Procedural History: After Miranda was convicted, he appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court who reaffirmed his rights had not been violated.

Read More

Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Summary

437 Words | 2 Pages

Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark case where Ernesto Miranda was arrested for rape and kidnapping and was refused an attorney even after he requested one during custodial interrogation, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Miranda's confession could not be used because Miranda was unaware of his Fifth Amendment right to refrain from making self incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to have legal counsel, nor were his rights made known to him by investigators, even after Miranda requested legal counsel (Bethel, 2015).   According to Criminal Law and Procedure, Miranda protects the suspect more than anyone else in the equation as it allows the suspect to be aware of their right to remain silent and that legal counsel is available to them if they

Read More

Dbq Miranda Essay

1163 Words | 5 Pages

In 1966, an influential court case occurred – one that would shape the United States to improve the justice system. Ernesto Miranda was accused for crimes and identified by the victim, after which he was then interrogated. Miranda orally confessed to a crime and signed a written confession; however, he did not request a lawyer, nor was he advised of his right to have one present. Due to the inadequate constitutionality of the situation, Miranda was able to challenge the Supreme Court in this conviction. The ruling in Miranda represents the fulfillment of the legal tradition of the promise of self-incrimination by offering protection in statements, reinforcing the Fifth Amendment, and the equity of suspects during interrogation.

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona Research Paper

440 Words | 2 Pages

The Supreme Court stated that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because he did not ask to hear them(Miranda v. Arizona). By not hearing all of his rights Miranda would not be able to successfully win the trial. Even though Miranda wrote his confession under the statement saying that he was completely aware of his rights, his lawyers argued that his rights were not fully explained to him. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 under Earl Warren. They agreed that Miranda’s confessions could not be used as evidence in the crime because

Read More

Miranda Warning Dbq

883 Words | 4 Pages

Arizona ruling eliminated the fear of the accused from torture and coercion and notified individuals of their rights that they otherwise wouldn’t have known that they had. The ruling explicitly stated that if a person was not informed of their Fifth Amendment right, then compelling pressures could cause a person who otherwise not have spoken, to incriminate themselves (Document J). In the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, it had not specifically stated that a suspect must be informed of their rights before they are questioned. The ruling of Miranda v. Arizona finally cleared up the confusion concerning the rights of the accused and self-incrimination and required officials of the law to read out the warning known as the Miranda warning to anyone they may question. Additionally, manuals such as Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation, specified the rules to be used during interrogations to prevent coercion (Document F).

Read More

Earl Warren's Supreme Court Cases

1023 Words | 5 Pages

Arizona case argued whether or not “the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect” (Oyez). Miranda, after two hours of interrogation, gave a written confession to the police saying that he was guilty. However, the police did confess that they had never informed Miranda of his Fifth Amendment rights, which included a right to an attorney, and because of this, the argument was made that the police had violated Miranda's Fifth Amendment rights. Warren, who was a part of the majority, in this case, decided in favor of Miranda, and that “the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination is available in all settings. Therefore, prosecution may not use statements arising from a custodial interrogation of a suspect unless certain procedural safeguards were in place” (Oyez).

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 Vs Arizona Essay

794 Words | 4 Pages

Based on his confession, which he gave without being aware of his rights, Miranda was convicted. The U.S. Supreme Court concurred, concluding that Miranda had not been properly informed of his constitutional rights by the authorities. There were major issues

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona 1966

652 Words | 3 Pages

Miranda v. Arizona (1966). This is the U.S. Supreme Court case that resulted in the ruling of the way police conduct their work when a suspect is in custody. The head of the Justices was Earl Warren, he specifically ruled that the prosecution may not use self-incriminating facts made by a person who was under questioning in police custody unless certain precautions were taken before hand to ensure a fair trial for the defendant. The court had decided to set new guidelines to ensure that the defendant understands his/her constitutional right to know that they do not have to self-incriminate themselves. This new policy would later be known as the Miranda rights, these consisted of the following, you have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law.

Read More

Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

890 Words | 4 Pages

Even though what Miranda did was a violent and horrible action. His trial still brought up controversy in the court system which later turned into a Miranda warning card that police stations around the country use to this

Read More

Police Power Vs Civil Liberties Essay

494 Words | 2 Pages

While being interrogated during the case, Miranda confessed to the crime but was not told of his right to remain silent or have a lawyer. Later, on appeal, Miranda stated he should have been told his rights, to that, the government objected. The Supreme Court stepped in, disagreeing with the government and made a person’s rights be read to them after every arrest

Read More

Miranda Rights Persuasive Speech

702 Words | 3 Pages

The Miranda is still today made only optional depending on some cases and how bad the situation is, like when it relates to putting other people in

Read More

More about Ernesto Miranda Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document