ipl-logo

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

694 Words3 Pages

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was accused of kidnapping and raping a woman when she was walking home from work in Phoenix, Arizona. Ernesto Miranda was arrested and asked a series of questions about the incident. He was questioned for two hours by the police until he confessed to his crimes. The police had unconstitutionally obtained Miranda’s confession. While Ernesto was being questioned he was not informed of the fifth amendment which protects one from being held accountable for committing a crime without being properly informed of one’s rights, and sixth amendment that promises citizens a speedy trial, a fair jury, and an attorney. Miranda’s signed confession included the statement that he was informed of his rights, when in fact he was not. …show more content…

Miranda’s attorney then requested the Arizona Supreme Court to uphold Ernesto’s conviction. The Supreme Court approved to hear the case of Miranda v Arizona again along with three other cases (Miranda v. Arizona Podcast). The four cases together would clear up any confusion from the Escobedo v Illinois trial that remained. In the first trial Ernesto Miranda did not have a lawyer. The police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession. The police had Ernesto Miranda write out his confession of rape and kidnapping. They did this before informing Miranda about having his lawyer present or having the right to remain silent. Ernesto's written confession was then used against him at his trial (Miranda v. Arizona | Law Case). The signed confession was acquired without warning because of this he self incriminated himself. Ernesto’s signed confession was overruled and he was sentenced to twenty years in prison

Show More
Related

  • Ernesto Miranda Case Study

    174 Words  | 1 Pages

    Ernesto Miranda, was an immigrant that lived in Phoenix, Arizona. He was accused of kidnap and rape by a woman and arrested in 1963. While the police questioned him, they did not inform him of the Fifth Amendment (protection of self-incrimination) and the Sixth Amendment (right to an attorney). This case involved Mr. Chief Justice Warren, Mr. Justice Clark, Mr. Justice Harlan (accompanied by Mr. Justice Stewart), and Mr. Justice White. The court argued upon this case on February 28-March 1, 1966.

    Read More

  • Why Is Mcculloch Vs Maryland Important

    1933 Words  | 8 Pages

    Mucolly The Supreme Court settles yet another argument; this time, it is MuCulloch v. Maryland. The end decision helped broaden the roles of the federal government, but not necessarily supplied the government with more power. It also shows that activities that fall into the federal category are taken care of seriously and with a reason.

    Read More

  • Case Summary Of The Miranda V. Arizona Brief Case

    539 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miranda’s attorney appealed to the U.S Supreme Court which were going to hear his case. In the Trial Court a counsel was appointed to defend him in the robbery and rape and kidnapping case. Identify the issue (IRAC): Was it the officers right to inform the suspect of his 5th and 6th amendment before interrogating him?

    Read More

  • Summary Of The John Couey Case

    431 Words  | 2 Pages

    The brazen police misconduct in violating an individual's Sixth Amendment right to counsel warranted dismissal of the confession; there no mere technicality or question of Couey's invocation of his right to counsel as he requested a lawyer "eight times in 46 seconds" (Associated Press, 2006).

    Read More

  • Miranda's Confession, Injustice In Pheonix, Arizona

    364 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Pheonix, Arizona for the kidnapping and raping of a woman. When questioned by police officers, Miranda would eventually give a confession, and sign it, which wasn 't the case.. Before the court, this confession would be used against Miranda, and with it, the implication that it was received voluntarily and with the convicted knowing his rights. Miranda was convicted with a 20-30 year sentence. Upon eventually learning that his confession was obtained unlawfully, Miranda would appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking for an overturn, and when that fell through, would turn to the United States Supreme Court, filing a habeas corpus.

    Read More

  • Miranda Vs. Arizona Policing Cases

    538 Words  | 3 Pages

    Since the Police never informed Miranda of his rights he had no counsel, never finished the 9th grade, and had a former history of mental instability. The prosecution on the case only used his own wrongfully obtained confession against him, and sentenced him 20-30 years in prison. He had appealed to the Arizona Supreme court claiming that the Police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession, the court disagreed with him and upheld the charges and

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case Study

    1745 Words  | 7 Pages

    citizens and their rights that have been granted to them in the amendments of the constitution. All U.S. citizens are treated equally and all have the same rights that authorities must give them in order for them to be arrested or detained for violating rights that they never were stated. In 1966, Miranda v. Arizona case exercised the rights of the amendments for a man that didn’t know his rights because the police never told him so he won his case and was freed because he was never told his rights. Miranda v. Arizona was closely related to the case Escobedo v. Illinois (1964). Falk stated that the appeal of the Arizona Supreme Court ruling was made possible because the earlier decision.

    Read More

  • Overview Of Miranda Ruling

    861 Words  | 4 Pages

    In March of 1963 a Mexican born immigrant named Ernesto Miranda living in the city of Phoenix, Arizona was chosen in a police lineup by an 18 year old woman who was accusing him of kidnapping and raping her. Miranda was then arrested and questioned by police for several hours before he confessed to the crimes both verbally and in writing. Miranda signed several forms when he confessed to the crimes, including one stating that his confession was completely voluntary and that he understood all his rights. But during the interrogation the police officers did not tell Miranda that he had the right to remain silent, a right granted to him by the Fifth Amendment.

    Read More

  • Ernesto Miranda's Fifth And Sixth Amendment Rights

    696 Words  | 3 Pages

    Ernesto Miranda, a suspect charged with rape, kidnapping and robbery, had his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights violated during a police interrogation. These injustices lead to a United States Supreme Court trial, whose outcome forever imprints our justice system. Ernesto Miranda, a resident of Phoenix, was charged for rape, kidnapping, and robbery in 1963. Miranda was identified by the victim and he was detained and interrogated by police for two hours, where he allegedly conceded to the crimes he was charged of and signed a written statement included with a typed disclaimer, without any attorney present. The police neglected to apprise Miranda of his right to an attorney and his right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination prior to police interrogation, which is a violation of the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

    Read More

  • Arizona Vs Miranda Essay

    829 Words  | 4 Pages

    The legal case of Arizona v. Miranda, which took place in 1966, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court that had a profound impact on criminal procedure in the country. The case involved Ernesto Miranda, a man who had been arrested and charged with kidnapping and rape in Phoenix, Arizona. The overall issue of the case was the admissibility of the confession that Miranda had made to the police during his interrogation, which had been obtained without informing him of his constitutional rights. The court ultimately ruled that Miranda's confession could not be used as evidence against him, as the police had violated his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. This decision led to the creation of what today is known

    Read More

  • Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    890 Words  | 4 Pages

    Arizona, Were his rights violated? It is obvious that Ernesto 's rights were not clear to him. Before his interrogation, Miranda was unaware of his rights and when he made his confession, they were entirely thrown out. In 1965, the court agreed to heir his case. Miranda 's case won 5-4 and a statement was made.

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case Study

    550 Words  | 3 Pages

    Being silent does not mean that an individual has waived his or her Miranda rights, but there are certain words, gestures, or actions that can constitute waiving one's rights. Once someone has been formally charged with a crime and has made a request for an attorney, the Sixth Amendment protects defendants from officers attempting to gather incriminating evidence against them without the presence of their

    Read More

  • Summary Of Miranda Vs Arizona Case Brief

    531 Words  | 3 Pages

    Case Brief Case: Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Facts: The Miranda warning, which informs criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to an attorney while they are in police custody or being questioned in a detention facility, was created by the landmark Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966). It was brought by Ernesto Miranda, who was detained under the charges of rape, kidnapping and robbery. He wasn't told of his right to an attorney or the right to remain silent before being questioned by the police, so Miranda admitted to the crimes while being interviewed. The confession was admitted into evidence during the trial, and Miranda was found guilty. Procedural History: After Miranda was convicted, he appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court who reaffirmed his rights had not been violated.

    Read More

  • Summary: The Case Of Colorado V. Connelly

    443 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the case of Colorado v. Connelly, Connelly approached an officer and said that he wanted to confess to a murder. After being read his Miranda rights, he still wanted to continue with his confession. He was taken to the station and again advised of his rights. He confessed to a murder and even led police to the scene of his admitted crime. He was held overnight and questioned again the next morning.

    Read More

  • Escobedo V. Illinois Trial Summary

    805 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the Escobedo v. Illinois trial, defendant Danny Escobedo was accused of his brother-in-law’s death. Leading up to the trial, the defendant’s brother-in-law was shot and killed. Although, Escobedo was brought in for questioning, he did not make a statement. When arrested, Escobedo was not informed of his right to keep silent. Escobedo was released from questioning with the help of his lawyer through a state court writ of habeas corpus.

    Read More

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

Open Document