ipl-logo

Forensic Science: The Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

712 Words3 Pages

Rachel Ortiz- Wynne Ms. Bonner Forensic Science Date assigned: 4 October 2017 Date due: 17 October 2017 Miranda v. Arizona The case of Miranda versus the state of Arizona started out when Ernesto Miranda was arrested. The crime committed was an armed robbery, kidnap and rape of an 18 year old girl. The victim was Lois Ann Jameson. The crime took place on March 3rd 1963 in Phoniex, Arizona. Ernesto Miranda was arrested after the brother of the victim found Miranda’s trunk. He was arrested on March 13th 1963. After being arrested he was put in a lineup and was in a voice lineup and a postitive Identification was made. After being in the interegation room for two hours, Ernesto Miranda gave a full confession of his crime. He was not made aware of his rights to have an attorney present while he was making this confession, …show more content…

During Ernesto Miranda’s trial, his lawyer Alvin Moore tried to get his confession to be rule out as evidence during the trial. The judge overrule Alvin’s objection and the confession was kept as evidence in the trail. Keeping the confession in the trail caused Ernesto Miranda to be convicted of rape and kidnapping and was going to be sentenced for 20 to 30 years for each charge, but they were going to be served concurrently, which means at the same time. After the verdict was given, Alvin Moore filled for appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. The reason for his appeal was that the confession given by Ernesto Miranda should not have been admitted into the trial because it was obtained without making him aware of all his rights. John Paul Frank and John Flynn

Show More
Related
556 Words | 3 Pages

Case 442 U.S. 707 Fare v. Michael C. February 27, 1979 through June 20, 1979. This case involves Michael C., a sixteen year old juvenile, brought to the police station in California by Van Nuys police on a murder investigation. The juvenile was read his Miranda prophylactic protection rights before being questioned; he requested to speak to his probation officer but was denied. Michael agreed to speak with the officers and also waived his rights to counsel. While doing this, he brought forward incriminating statements against him that in return, the juvenile landed himself in court on a murder trial.

Read More
527 Words | 3 Pages

The case involved an individual by the name of Danny Escobedo, who was arrested on January 19, 1960, for the murder of his brother-in-law. Escobedo was arrested without a warrant and interrogated; he did not make any statement to the police and was released after contacting his lawyer. On January 30, Benedict DiGerlando, told the police about Escobedo’s involvement in the crime that Escobedo “had fired the fatal shots” (Escobedo v. Illinois- Supreme Court Cases: The Dynamic Court, 1999, pg.2). He was later arrested a second time and taken to the police headquarters. Soon enough Escobedo requested to have “advice from my lawyer”

Read More
485 Words | 2 Pages

Additionally, if the confession was coerced and impacted the trial, did the Court conduct a harmless error analysis? Was Fulminante’s 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination violated and was the admission of the confession a violation of his 14th Amendment right to due process? Holding: The Supreme Court ruled that the Arizona Court had correctly applied both tests when the case was ordered retried without the confessions entered as evidence. Rationale:

Read More
1196 Words | 5 Pages

The decision of The Supreme court for Miranda V. Arizona addressed 4 separate trials. In the Miranda V. Arizona trial while he was being questioned he had no contact with the outside world. In the trial he was not told all of his rights. The questioning brought about oral statements, three of which, were signed statements that were disclosed at trial. Miranda was arrested at his house where he was then taken to the police station, and identified by an witness.

Read More
951 Words | 4 Pages

It was on February 15, 1986 in Salt Lake, Utah, where the mother of Cammie K. reported the sexual abuse of her nine-year-old daughter by a man known as Mr. Griffin. Detective Strong and two other County deputies were assigned for the investigation on the case. During their investigation, detective Strong and other deputies went to interview Cammie K. at her home, where she told officers in different occasions that the Mr. Griffin sexually abused her. After that interview, the officers then went over to interview Mr. Griffin. At his home, Mr. Griffin confessed to being the abuser, but after the coercion interview by Detective Strong.

Read More
783 Words | 4 Pages

Abstract Miranda v. Arizona took place in 1996. The case involves a Hispanic man named, Ernesto Miranda and the state of New York. Miranda is being charged with rape and kidnapping. He was held in interrogation for a lengthy amount of time until he eventually confessed. He was found guilty and the conviction was approved by the supreme court because he did not request a lawyer.

Read More
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
694 Words | 3 Pages

Miranda’s attorney then requested the Arizona Supreme Court to uphold Ernesto’s conviction. The Supreme Court approved to hear the case of Miranda v Arizona again along with three other cases (Miranda v. Arizona Podcast). The four cases together would clear up any confusion from the Escobedo v Illinois trial that remained. In the first trial Ernesto Miranda did not have a lawyer.

Read More
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
272 Words | 2 Pages

Facts: In this case, a 23-year-old man named Ernesto Miranda was arrested at his home in Phoenix, Arizona, and taken to the police station for questioning about a rape and kidnapping. The police questioned him for two hours, and were able to get a written confession out of Miranda. The confession was used in court as evidence during the trial. Miranda was found guilty of rape and kidnapping and was sentenced between twenty to thirty years in prison for each count. The Arizona Supreme Court confirmed the conviction and Miranda’s case was sent to the U.S Supreme Court.

Read More
804 Words | 4 Pages

During trial, the defense attorney, Alvin Moore, argued that the written statement was not valid in court because Miranda was never told of his right to counsel, he was not advised of his right to remain silent, and was unaware that his statements could be used against him in a court of law. Moore's objection was overruled and because of the evidence and written confession, Miranda was sentenced to 20-30 years of imprisonment on each charge. Moore filed Miranda's case to the Arizona Supreme Court claiming that Miranda's confession was not completely voluntary. The written confession was admitted in the Arizona

Read More
1061 Words | 5 Pages

(2014). Facts and Case Summary - Miranda v. Arizona. United States Courts. https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-miranda-v-arizona United States Courts. (2017). United States Courts.

Read More
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
538 Words | 3 Pages

Since the Police never informed Miranda of his rights he had no counsel, never finished the 9th grade, and had a former history of mental instability. The prosecution on the case only used his own wrongfully obtained confession against him, and sentenced him 20-30 years in prison. He had appealed to the Arizona Supreme court claiming that the Police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession, the court disagreed with him and upheld the charges and

Read More
672 Words | 3 Pages

A) Case Name and Citation Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602 (1966) B) Summary of the Facts Ernesto A. Miranda a resident of Phoenix, Arizona was accused of kidnapping and raping a woman. The police arrested Miranda and held him at the police station for interrogation. After two hours of interrogation, Miranda confessed to having committed the crimes. His confession was used against him in trial and Miranda was found guilty.

Read More

More about Forensic Science: The Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

Related Topics

Open Document