ipl-logo

Miranda V. Arizona Case Study

682 Words3 Pages

“The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination.”-Chief Justice Warren (landmarkcases.org). In March of 1963 an eighteen year old woman was assaulted. The suspect was interrogated without being read his rights. Due to the fact of not being read his rights the Fifth and Sixth Amendment was created. Since the Miranda V. Arizona case has been adopted the way U.S. government has helped mold the nation’s justice system by introducing the Fifth and Sixth Amendment.
In March of 1963 in Phoenix, Arizona, a resident by the name of Ernesto Miranda sexually assaulted, kidnapped, and robbed an eighteen year old woman as she was on her way home from her usual bus stop. Just days after the incident, the victim reported the events which unfolded that night to the Phoenix police department. The following day, the woman and her cousin were driving by her usual bus stop and noticed the car that abducted her; she quickly called the police and reported the …show more content…

He got in touch to a very distinguished Arizona trial lawyer John J. Flynn, who decided to take over the case with the assistance of John P. Frank, they appealed to the United States Supreme Court. On the behalf of Miranda, Frank wrote, “The day is here to recognize the full meaning of the sixth amendment.” (Frank). The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of a suspect to a lawyer. In addition to the Fifth Amendment protects defendants from being forced to incriminate themselves. Although Miranda wrote on a paper stating that he was aware of his legal rights. His lawyers are claiming that he was not in fact fully aware of his legal rights so his confession should not be deemed valid to be used against him in

Open Document