Miranda Vs Arizona Case

The United States constitution is a document that, although it’s over 200 years old, still makes up the foundations of the United States government. The only reason it’s possible for a country to maintain a set of laws for 200 years is because the Supreme Court is allowed to make amendments to these laws as needed. This makes the constitution a living document. Throughout history, some of the country’s most famous court cases have been responsible for these amendments. One major case that affected the U.S. Constitution was Miranda v. Arizona in 1966. This case created huge changes in the protection of Fifth Amendment rights. The reason this case went to the Supreme Court is because Ernesto Miranda, the defendant, incriminated himself during

Miranda was arrested for kidnapping, robbery, and rape. He wasn’t told his rights before the police questioned him. He also had a history of mental instability and didn’t have a completed high school education. Miranda confessed to committing the crimes after several hours of questioning and no lawyer present. He was given a sentence of 20 to 30 years for kidnapping and rape. He was convicted almost solely on his confession (pbs.org). This happened because he had no understanding of his rights and the police either didn’t care or weren’t aware of that fact. He appealed his conviction based on violation of his fifth and sixth amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of

The case of People v. Tanner, decided on June 23, 2014, is an example of a case in which the accused felt their Miranda rights were violated. On October 17, 2011, George Tanner was arrested for murder, read his Miranda Rights, and taken to jail. He then asked for counsel and to stop questioning until he had a lawyer. While talking to a psychologist shortly after, he said he wanted “to get something off his chest”. The psychologist informed the administrator of the jail and they called in a lawyer so they could speak to him. Tanner was re-read his Miranda Rights, but this time he waived them. Unknown to Tanner, there was already an attorney there to assist him. Instead of bringing the attorney in, police first went in to ask Tanner a couple of questions. During these questions, he incriminated himself by giving details linking him to the murder. Tanner was charged with open murder (MCL 750.316) and mutilation of a dead body (MCL 750.160) (scholar.google.com). When he tried to appeal this decision, on the basis that his Miranda Rights were violated, the Supreme Court ruled against him. The Supreme Court ruled against Tanner because his rights were never violated. He willingly waived his rights and told police the information which led to his arrest. There is no part of the Fifth Amendment which states that the