Miranda V Arizona Case Study
CASE NAME: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
FACTS: The cases of Mr. Miranda, Mr. Vignera, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Westover had similar cases, regarding the admissibility of their confessions. These cases were then addressed together by the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Miranda was identified by a witness and arrested, but was not notified of his rights, although he singed a written confession after several hours of interrogation that stated that he was aware of the rights he was not notified about. A jury was presented an oral admission of guilt, as well as the written confession. The jury found Mr. Miranda guilty of murder and rape, and sentenced him to 20-30 years on both counts. Mr. Vignera, who was the second defendant, was arrested for a …show more content…
He was taken into detention where he was questioned, which a transcript was made. The oral confession and the transcript had been shown to the jury at the trial, and Mr. BVignera was sentenced to 30-60 years. However, there was no proof at all that he was aware of his right against self-incrimination. Mr. Westover was arrested by Kansas City police as a suspect in two cases. The Kansas City police department also received a report from the FBI that the defendant was wanted for a felony charge in California. He was interrogated for 14 hours by the local police, after which he was handed to the FBI, who interrogated the defendant for more than two hours, untill he signed confessions. These were presented at the trial of Mr. Westover, and he was found guilty and got 15 years on both the robberies. Mr. Westover, just like Mr. Miranda and Mr. Vignere was not notified of his constitutional rights.The last defendant, Mr. Stewart, was identified as the endorser of checks that was stolen in a series of purse snatches. One of the victims died of injuries. Stewart was arrested at his house, along with his wife and three others. Stewart was then placed in a cell, and was
FACTS: The cases of Mr. Miranda, Mr. Vignera, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Westover had similar cases, regarding the admissibility of their confessions. These cases were then addressed together by the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Miranda was identified by a witness and arrested, but was not notified of his rights, although he singed a written confession after several hours of interrogation that stated that he was aware of the rights he was not notified about. A jury was presented an oral admission of guilt, as well as the written confession. The jury found Mr. Miranda guilty of murder and rape, and sentenced him to 20-30 years on both counts. Mr. Vignera, who was the second defendant, was arrested for a …show more content…
He was taken into detention where he was questioned, which a transcript was made. The oral confession and the transcript had been shown to the jury at the trial, and Mr. BVignera was sentenced to 30-60 years. However, there was no proof at all that he was aware of his right against self-incrimination. Mr. Westover was arrested by Kansas City police as a suspect in two cases. The Kansas City police department also received a report from the FBI that the defendant was wanted for a felony charge in California. He was interrogated for 14 hours by the local police, after which he was handed to the FBI, who interrogated the defendant for more than two hours, untill he signed confessions. These were presented at the trial of Mr. Westover, and he was found guilty and got 15 years on both the robberies. Mr. Westover, just like Mr. Miranda and Mr. Vignere was not notified of his constitutional rights.The last defendant, Mr. Stewart, was identified as the endorser of checks that was stolen in a series of purse snatches. One of the victims died of injuries. Stewart was arrested at his house, along with his wife and three others. Stewart was then placed in a cell, and was