ipl-logo

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

744 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Outcome of the miranda v arizona case

The Supreme Court's choice in Miranda v. Arizona tended to four unique cases including custodial cross examinations. In each of these cases, the accused was addressed by cops or an indicting lawyer in a room in which he was cut off from the outside world. In none of these cases was the accused given a full and compelling cautioning of his rights at the start of the cross examination process. In every case, the scrutinizing evoked oral confirmations and, in three of them, signed statements that were conceded at trial. “Miranda was arrested at his home and taken in custody to a police station where he was identified by the complaining witness. He was then interrogated by two police officers for two hours, which resulted in a signed, written …show more content…

“Miranda written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the objection of the defense attorney and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty ("Facts and Case Summary - Miranda v. Arizona," n.d.). Miranda v. Arizona: After Miranda's conviction was revoked by the Supreme Court, the State of Arizona retried him. At the second trial, Miranda's admission was not brought into evidence. Miranda was indeed indicted and condemned to 20-30 years in jail. The justice system changed by this case because, the prosecution may not utilize proclamations, regardless of whether exculpatory or inculpatory, originating from custodial cross examination of the respondent unless it shows the utilization of procedural protections powerful to secure the benefit against self-implication.“The apex of the individual-rights emphasis in Supreme Court decisions was reached in the 1966 case of Miranda v. Arizona, which established the famous requirement of a police “rights advisement” of suspects” (Schmalleger, 2018, p. 198). Furthermore the miranda rights are now included in the 5th …show more content…

The attacker dragged her into his vehicle, tied her hands and forced her to lie down in the back seat. After driving for 20 minutes, the man stopped outside of the city and sexually assaulted her. He requested she give him her cash and advised her to lie down again in the back seat. Then dropped her off a few blocks away from her home. Considering rape is a felony offense in Arizona and is considered a class two (2) felony, up to 14 years in prison. If the defendant has a prior felony sexual assault conviction up to 21 years in prison. If two (2) or more prior convictions, up to 28 years in prison ("13-1406 - Sexual assault; classification; increased punishment,"

Show More
Related
1740 Words | 7 Pages

The Missouri v. Seibert case does not overrule Oregon v. Elstad. Instead this case decides on when the ruling or decision made in Elstad would be applicable. Officers should now be able to look at situations and decide when it is an appropriate time to give Miranda Warnings. It also guides officers in making sure to give the speech to the defendant before interrogation has happened, or when it may be a situation that could count as a form of interrogation. If there is a second interrogation, the defendant should have the rights read before to keep both sets of information given from being inadmissible in the

Read More
529 Words | 3 Pages

The conviction was based off of the confession Miranda gave and the eyewitness identification of him by the victim. After Miranda was convicted, he was represented by different lawyers in front of the supreme court and they argued that the police questioning/interrogating without an attorney present violated Miranda’s fifth and sixth amendment rights, and therefore should not be able

Read More
1553 Words | 7 Pages

The questioning of Seibert appeal that the officer's intentional use of an un-Mirandized interrogation to get the initial confession made her later confession inadmissible in court. A couple of issues the court must face are whether repeated states are admissible in court based on custodial interrogation prior to Miranda warning also, The court must decide whether the questioning of Ms. Seibert was coercion in nature and that the officer intentional coerced information out of Ms. Seibert before advising of her Miranda Rights by looking at the case of Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 (1985) to understand that circumstance involved in their previous

Read More
442 Words | 2 Pages

The boy was escorted to a school conference room, where he was interrogated in the presence of school officials. J.D.B. 's parents were not contacted, and he was not given any warnings about his

Read More
1089 Words | 5 Pages

At trail, over the objections of Miranda’s defense attorney, prosecutor’s used both the written statement and police testimony of Miranda’s oral confession to secure a guilty verdict from the jury. Miranda was sentenced to 20 to 30 years of prison for each charge. The main legal issue in the case was if Miranda’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination were violated when Phoenix detectives, after his arrest but prior to interrogation, failed to inform his of his rights; The right to remain silent, to consult 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
528 Words | 3 Pages

Throughout the 1900s, the critical motion of the Civil Rights Movement greatly influenced society. The various cases that were introduced in courts impacted the fight for equality as well as the creation of stronger laws. A powerful case in this era was Miranda v. Arizona. In this case, a man that confessed to accusations was set free because he was not advised of his rights to remain silent and request a lawyer. The ruling of this case shows the fulfillment of the legal tradition of the promise against self-incrimination by showing the importance of the Fifth Amendment, the signifcance of the right to an attorney, and that under the law, you are innocent until proven guilty.

Read More
893 Words | 4 Pages

“Miranda v. Arizona” is a case that was presented in the high court in the United States of America. The case addresses four distinct cases that may be considered identical. Each of the four cases involved defendants who were interrogated by the police officers, prosecuting attorney or detectives where they were forced to give information about various crimes committed as they were identified as the suspects. Miranda, who was a Mexican immigrant, was identified by a Phoenix woman as one of the perpetrators who kidnapped and raped her. This resulted to an arrest that was followed by a police interrogation that was carried out for two hours (Vander, & Kamisar, 2013).

Read More
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
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
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
486 Words | 2 Pages

Again, the evidence would be suppressed because the defendant was not read his Miranda rights while being questioned. The exclusion to this would be the age of the defendant while confessing. (Burke, 2005). Under the totality of the circumstances test factors such as age, experience, education, background, and intelligence are considered to the circumstances surrounding the confession. The Miranda decision states that an officer does not have to interrupt a confession to read the Miranda

Read More
890 Words | 4 Pages

The problem arose when the police officers said they had not advised Miranda of his right to an attorney. Miranda’s lawyer was concerned that his Sixth Amendment Right had been violated. This case was noticed by the ACLU and was taken to the Supreme Court. This case raised issues within the Supreme Court on the rights of Criminal Defendants.

Read More
247 Words | 1 Pages

The Miranda Rights have always been a controversial subject in or out of court. Some people argue Miranda rights ensure justice and preserve liberty while others argue it does the complete opposite. Miranda Right, also referred to as Miranda Warning, has been around for 50 years and it is something that has definitely been beneficial to many law enforcement cases. Without these rights we would still be in the same position as Mr. Miranda and would be struggling to achieve justice and liberty. It is essential to understand the impact these rights bring in order to understand why it is such important in court.

Read More
538 Words | 3 Pages

There were many breakthroughs in Europe after 1500, but one of the most influential was the Scientific Revolution. This revolution were unique, for it paved the way for modern science and intellectual thought through advances in physics, re-conception of the universe, and mathematics. It was clear that, with such advances, the world was slowing becoming more depend on reasoning, rather than “traditional cultural authorities”, and this contributed to Europe's growth towards becoming a world powerhouse after initially founding the capitalist system in the 1700s (512). Following the early stages of capitalist economic practices, an astronomer, by the name of Nicolaus Copernicus, presented a theory that argued that the universe is heliocentric (514). This theory was groundbreaking because it not only challenged old scientific thought, but it also challenged the Church's belief that the earth is at the center because it was

Read More

More about Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

Related Topics

Open Document