Preview

Miranda Vs Arizona Case Study

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1503 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Miranda Vs Arizona Case Study
In the Miranda vs Arizona case Miranda established that the police are required to inform arrested persons that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them, and that they have the right to an attorney. The case involved a claim by the plaintiff that the state of Arizona, by obtaining a confession from him without having informed him of his right to have a lawyer present, had violated his rights under the Fifth Amendment regarding self incrimination. Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape and was interrogated for a long period of time. This interrogation resulted in a signed confession. At court Miranda lawyer argued that the confession was obtained from a person who does not understand their rights. The court agreed that a person should be informed of their rights and understand them before the police …show more content…
This goes back to letting a guilty man walk loose amongst the citizens, what they should have done was let go of the fact that they did not read him his rights in a timely manner. He still got read his rights and he probably understood them but he just did not want to get accused for the crime that he committed. So in my belief the case should have gotten overturned by the Miranda vs Arizona case. In today’s society almost all policemen never forget to read the person under arrest their rights because they know about the Miranda vs Arizona case. I believe that they have put more pressure on the police to say the rights because its a matter of the criminal getting let go because they forgot to read them even if the person already knows their rights. If in case that that does happen I still would not let the criminal go if the case was for something bad or something that would harm
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Escobedo Case: The Miranda V. Arizona
    • 163 Words
    • 1 Page

    Escobedo Case: The Miranda V. Arizona

    In the Escobedo case the defendant was found guilty after admitting to the crime. Escobedo asked for a lawyer on several occasions and officers denied allowing him to speak to his lawyer and prevent his lawyer form speaking to him. Following this case the states required police to advise individuals who have been arrest for a felony that they have the right to counsel and silence. Following the Escobedo case the Supreme Court reversed an Arizona court conviction know as the Miranda v. Arizona case. The Miranda v. Arizona case was a case of a 23-year-old man who was arrested for kidnapping and rape. Officers arrested Miranda and transported him to the police station for questioning on the kidnapping and rape and after two hours of questioning…

    • 163 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V Arizona Case Study
    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Miranda V Arizona Case Study

    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…

    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Summary
    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Summary

    The complaining witness identified him in a lineup and he was interrogated by two police officers. The interrogation lasted for hours which finally resulted to Miranda’s signing of a written confession. At trial, the oral and written confessions were presented to the jury and subsequently Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count. He appealed to the Supreme Court of Arizona which held that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated in the course of obtaining the confession.…

    • 1018 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs. Arizon Supreme Court Case
    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Miranda Vs. Arizon Supreme Court Case

    Why is this even considered a constitutional law case? How did Miranda v. Arizona turn into a landmark United States Supreme Court case? When this case went to trial Miranda’s court appointed attorney found out that the police never informed Miranda of his Constitutional right to counsel. So in fact by not informing Miranda that he had the right to counsel the police violated his Fourteenth Amendment which is the right to due process and his sixth amendment which is a right to counsel. If he would have had counsel present in the room he may never have signed that form confessing to the kidnapping and rape of that 18 year old woman. Miranda’s court appointed attorney at trial objected to the confession saying that his clients fifth, sixth, and fourteenth amendment rights were violated. The trial judge overruled the objection mainly because the defendant never formally asked to have an attorney present or to see or speak with his attorney. So Miranda was convicted of the crime and sent to up to 30 years in prison. Miranda’s attorney the appealed the decision all the way up to the Arizona supreme court. The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that they also believed that his rights were not violated because he never asked for an…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Dickerson Research Paper
    • 2261 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Miranda Vs Dickerson Research Paper

    While in custody, Miranda was interrogated by police for hours until he signed a written confession. Not once during the interrogation was Miranda informed of his rights to counsel or to remain silent. During the trial his court appointed attorney objected to the admission of the statement on the grounds that Miranda was not informed of his rights. Given the amount of evidence, including the confession itself, the court overruled the objection. After being found guilty and sentenced to 20-30 years in prison for his crimes, Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. Due to the fact that Miranda failed to specifically request an attorney, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s decision. The case was then forwarded to the Supreme Court along with Westover v. United States, Vignera v. New York, and California v.…

    • 2261 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Brief in Irac Format
    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Brief in Irac Format

    Mr. Miranda appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court of Arizona. The Supreme Court of Arizona found that Mr. Miranda was fully aware of his constitutional rights, and his conviction was affirmed. Mr. Miranda appealed the Supreme Court of Arizona’s decision to the United States Supreme Court.…

    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona Essay Example
    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona Essay Example

    Miranda's defense attorney appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. His attorney argued that his confession should have been excluded from trial because he had not been informed of his rights, nor had an attorney been present during his interrogation. The police officers involved admitted that they had not given Miranda any explanation of his rights. They argued, however, that because Miranda had been convicted of a crime in the past, he must have been aware of his rights. The Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal and upheld his conviction.…

    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona
    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    My Supreme Court Case: Miranda V. Arizona

    By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.” The Court also held that “without proper safeguards, the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would otherwise do so freely.” Therefore, a defendant “must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.” As those reasons, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Arizona in Miranda, reversed the judgment of the New York Court of Appeals in Vignera, reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Westover, and affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in Stewart.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona Case Analysis
    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona Case Analysis

    The Fifth Amendment which in 1934 the “which protects a defendant from being compelled to be a witness against themselves” (Wright, 2013). The self-incrimination portion of the Fifth Amendment was tested case of Miranda v. Arizona. This is the same case that leads to the Miranda Warning. The Miranda warning is an “explanation of rights that must be given before any custodial interrogation” so that self-incrimination will not be a factor. No person can be compelled to openly admit to a crime. They cannot try to pry information out of someone if they have not been read their rights or if they ask for their attorney. It is a different story though is someone just starts rambling on when they are not asked. “Suspects can reinitiate an interrogation by coming forward and indicating to police they wish to talk and are willing to waive their Miranda rights. If there is a break in detention, the police may reinitiate the interrogation after fourteen days” (Wright, 2013).…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona
    • 2098 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    Mіrаndа vs. Arizona was а case that consіdеrеd the rights of the dеfеndаnts in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Indіvіduаl rights did not change with the Mіrаndа decision; however it created new constitutional guidelines for law enforcement, attorneys, and the courts. The guidelines ensure that the individual rights of the fifth, sixth and the fourteenth amendment are protected. This decision requires that unless а suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning anything he says may not be introduced in а court of law (Mіrаndа v. Arizona, 1966). The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow а code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them.…

    • 2098 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay
    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    Some of the judges were not pleased with the ruling, they stated that Miranda’s written statement confessing to the crimes should not be completely ruled out and not used as evidence in the case in court. Justice Tom C. Clark claimed in his dissenting opinion, “the majority’s opinion created an unnecessary strict interpretation of the Fifth Amendment that curtails the ability of the police to effectively execute their duties” (Miranda v. Arizona). The judges that ruled in favor of Maranda stated that an individual who is being persecuted under the law should indeed know their rights, a defendant must be made aware of their right to remain silent prior to any interrogation, and they have the right for an attorney to be present during the interrogation. This case is important because it created the Miranda warning as a preventative criminal procedure to ensure that when criminals who are being prosecuted they are made aware that their fifth amendment is not being violated and that anything they say will be used against them in a court of…

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona
    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which passed 5–4. The Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them.…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona
    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona

    The case of Miranda v. Arizona dealt with the question, “Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?” This case started in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for robbing $8 from a bank worker, and was charged with armed robbery. He already had a record for armed robbery, and a juvenile record including attempted rape, assault, and burglary. While Miranda was in police custody, he signed a written confession to the robbery, and also to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days before the robbery. After being convicted, Miranda’s lawyer appealed; on the basis that the defendant did not know he was protected from self-incrimination and therefore did not have to confess to his crimes.…

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Getting Rid of Miranda Rights
    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Getting Rid of Miranda Rights

    The Miranda rights are the rights a police offer is required to say to someone when the officer arrests that person. It is the warning that officers of the law give suspects so they know about their rights before they are interrogated. It was a law made after the conclusions of the Miranda vs. Arizona case. The case was very close as it was a 5-4 decision. The court ruled that any type of evidence, whether it is incriminating or proof of innocence, can be used as evidence in a case; however it can only be used if the police let the suspect know that they have the right to an attorney before and during questioning and also that the suspect can be silent to avoid self-incrimination before an interrogation. It is now a staple when police arrests are made. In this paper, I will explain why I believe that the Miranda Rights are not necessary anymore.…

    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Importance Of The Fourth Amendment
    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Importance Of The Fourth Amendment

    Although Miranda had not questioned the officer’s or requested for an attorney, the Supreme Court of Arizona stated that Miranda’s constitutional rights had not been violated. Miranda also suffered with a mental instability and did not request for counsel to be present during the case (Miranda, 2006). Miranda appealed the U.S. Supreme Courts decision. After review, Chief Justice Earl Warren stated that the evidence collected could not be used against Miranda due to Miranda not being informed of his rights before he was interrogated (Miranda, 2006). After this case, a series of “Miranda rights” were put into place to protect a defendant who is being arrested and interrogated (Miranda, 2006).…

    • 1594 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More

Related Topics