The Creation of Miranda Rights

757 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: the role of the bill of rights

The Creation of Miranda Rights

The constitution was designed to have basic laws to govern by and at the same time providing citizens with the basic rights of life, liberty and happiness ( which later became property). These terms are pretty vague thus they often need to be given specific meaning or interpretation in a courtroom. The constitution also includes a set of amendments that are called the bill of rights, because they mainly deal with rights of he “people” and citizens of the United States.

The fifth and sixth amendments protect the mentioned rights, specially of those being held in custody of the authorities. The fifth amendment states that “No person 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 law.” The sixth states that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining” (Bill of Rights, 1791)

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for armed robbery, and for kidnapping and raping a mentally challenged 18-year-old woman. He already had a record for armed robbery, and juvenile record including attempted rape, assault, and burglary. While in police custody he signed a written confession to the crime. After the conviction, his lawyers appealed, on the grounds that Miranda did not know he was protected from self-incrimination. This was the beginnin...

... middle of paper ...

...y controversial ruling since some say that the methods in which police officers collect the evidence should not matter if the evidence proves culpability. However the bill of rights protect all individuals even those that presumably have committed crimes. If the rights of an arrested suspects are violated in such way and he/she is not even aware of it, then the laws are going against all the freedom this country stands for. It would also give the go-ahead to other violations such as torture. The Miranda Ruling did not send Ernesto Miranda free he was still re-tried and convicted of the crime he had indeed committed.

Bibliography:

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Feinman, Jay F., 2001 LAW 101: Everything you need to know about

American Legal System.

http://lcweb.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trr038.html

Wilson And Dililio, 2001, The American Government

Show More
Related

  • Argumentative Essay On Miranda Rights

    1001 Words  | 3 Pages

    Evidence can prove that Miranda Rights should be an important right for the citizens of the United States Of America but should not be a digression or inconsequential and that shows Equality,liberty and justice. If we didn't have miranda rights we would end in a deleterious situation which would end in disaster for example, the police requirement to remember few amendment portrayed to Miranda Rights to recommend citizens that are inculpable to go to jail by police who can fabricate the situation.Evils don't have rights for other citizens like Paris which some of the victims have to be interrogated for a few days. “The Miranda warning prevents police from taking advantage of suspects who have been arrested or are in police custody. The Miranda Court determined that these protections were necessary to

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case: Ernesto Miranda's Law

    1148 Words  | 3 Pages

    Some people might even argue that the Miranda’s laws might actually be harmful to law enforcement. Because the Miranda rules specify that a suspect must be read their Miranda Rights and has a right to waive those rights. If the suspect declines, the police are required by law to stop all questioning. Even if a suspect initially waives his rights, during an interrogation he can halt the process at any time by asking for a lawyer or taking back the waiver. The police, from that moment on, are not allowed to suggest that he or she reconsider (ncpa.org). Because of this, many people feel that this has had a harmful affect on law enforcement. Police have found that is much more difficult to get a confession. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), the fraction of suspects questioned who confessed dropped from 49% to 14% in New York and from 48% to 29% in Pittsburg. With fewer confessions, police also found that it is much more difficult to solve crimes. For example, following the Court decision, the rates of violent crime cases solved fell drastically from 60% (or higher) to approximately 45%. This level has remained constant over the years. Also, due to fewer confessions and fewer crimes that are solved, this means there are fewer convictions. According to the NCPA, there are 3.85 fewer convictions every year because of Miranda. Defenders of the Miranda decision say that fewer crimes solved are for a good reason. They believe that law enforcement officers were forced to stop coercive questioning techniques that are unconstitutional. Over the years, the Supreme Court has watered down its stance in saying that the Miranda rules are not constitutional obligations, but rather “prophylactic” safeguards which are intended to insure that officers do not force a confession from a suspect. The need for both effective law enforcement as well as protection of society dictate the need

    Read More

  • The Supreme Court Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

    990 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... her rights given by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments before a trial. The Miranda Rights changed the way law enforcement conduct interrogations and gaining confessions. In taking the case, the Supreme Court had to determine the role police have in protecting the rights of the accused guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendment. The legal issue brought up was whether law enforcement officials must inform an accused of his constitutional rights as a responsibility.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Miranda Vs Arizona

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    Miranda rights are the entitlements every suspect has. An officer of the law is required to make these rights apparent to the suspect. These are the rights that you hear on every criminal investigation and policing show in the country, “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you, you have the right to consult an attorney, if you can no t afford an attorney one will be appointed for you.” After the suspect agrees that he or she understands his/her rights, the arrest and subsequent questioning and investigation may continue. These are liberties that were afforded to suspected criminals in the Miranda Vs Arizona. However, with every rule there also exceptions like: Maryland v. Shatzer, Florida v. Powell, and Berghuis v. Thompkins.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Miranda V. Arizona

    574 Words  | 2 Pages

    Miranda Rights became a United States Supreme Court decision in 1966 (Miranda v. Arizona), in which the high court made a decision in favor of and upheld that the Fifth Amendment rights of Miranda were violated. The Miranda ruling gives suspects the right to remain silent and not speak to any law enforcement as a means to prevent self incrimination, the right to have an attorney present during questioning, if an attorney is requested and the defendant can’t afford one, there are provisions in Miranda for an attorney to be appointed to defend the individual.

    Read More

  • Against Consent Searches

    1530 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...e police officers. Miranda established the precedent that a citizen has a right to be informed of his or her rights before the police attempt to violate them with the intent that the warnings erase the inherent coercion of the situation. The Court's violation of this precedent is especially puzzling due to this case's many similarities to Miranda.

    Read More

  • The Difference between the Miranda Rights and the Charter of Rights

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    Friedman, S. (2014, March 10). You have the right to ... not much: Why are there no 'Miranda rights'

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    we must first fully understand what rights citizens welcome Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. What are the "Miranda" rights?

    Read More

  • What Is The Miranda Warning?

    1063 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Duhaime’s Law Dictionary defines Miranda Warning as: “A requirement that police officers, in the U.S.A., before any questioning is so begun, warn suspects upon arrest that they have the right to remain silent, that any statement that they make could be used against them in a court of law, that they have the right to contact a lawyer and that if they cannot afford a lawyer, that one will be provided”. If an officer fails to read the Miranda warning prior to questioning, any confession or information that is obtained will not be admissible in court.

    Read More

  • Wrongful Conviction

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    From the moment an innocent individual enters the criminal justice system they are pressured by law enforcement whose main objective is to obtain a conviction. Some police interrogation tactics have been characterized as explicit violations of the suspect’s right to due process (Campbell and Denov 2004). However, this is just the beginning. Additional forms of suffering under police custody include assaults,

    Read More

  • Miranda v. Arizona

    721 Words  | 2 Pages

    This source explains the rights that should be told to a suspect that is arrested, the fifth and Sixth Amendments. It also explains how Miranda was identified as the criminal and what happened in the interrogation room. This source helped me understand the specific amendments that apply to Miranda Rights.

    Read More

  • Miranda vs. Arizona

    396 Words  | 1 Pages

    The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a 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. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include:

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case Study

    1709 Words  | 4 Pages

    It has been over fifty years since Miranda was arrested and will live on forever on the pockets of police officer. Every employed police officer in the America must know how to give Miranda rights. Miranda’s arrest actually made a significant impact on arrest and law enforcement. Before Miranda rights confession were used for prosecutions without hesitation, but after Miranda’s arrest things changed. Miranda v. Arizona is one of the most controversial Supreme Court cases and the case was even televised also. The Supreme Court Chief leader was Chief Justice Earl Warren who overlooked many important cases. In a split 5-4 vote in the Supreme courts overturned Ernesto Miranda’s conviction because he wasn’t informed of his rights under the fifth and sixth amendments of the United States of America constitution.

    Read More

  • The Fifth Amendment and Miranda v. Arizona

    1498 Words  | 3 Pages

    “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney...this is what you hear on all your favorite cop shows. But, where did this saying come from? In 1963 Ernesto Miranda a ninth grade dropout (PBS) was arrested and charged with kidnaping, rape, and armed robbery. The police interrogated him for two hours. During the question Miranda supposedly admitted to all the crimes. The police then used Miranda’s confession to convict him in court. While in prison Miranda appealed his case and eventually brought it to the Supreme Court. The court ruled five to four in favor of Miranda. The Supreme Court was correct in their ruling of Miranda v. Arizona, because the majority opinion correctly argued the fifth and sixth amendments. The dissenting opinion arguments regarding the fifth and sixth amendments were incorrect and in other cases involving due process this amendment was abused. In similar cases the court ruled in favor of the defendant because he was harmed during the interrogation process.

    Read More

  • State Court Case: The Case Of Miranda V. Arizona

    1271 Words  | 3 Pages

    The case of Miranda v. Arizona (384 U.S. 436 [1966]) is one of the most important cases in history. It brought about prominent rights that are still existent today in 2015 regarding interrogations and custody. The results of this case are still seen in the current criminal justice system. However, even though the rights that were given to the system by the court, there are still instances today in which these Miranda rights are violated. The concept of Miranda has evolved a lot from a court case to a code used by law enforcement during custodies and investigations.

    Read More

More about The Creation of Miranda Rights

Open Document