Miranda V. Case Study

451 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: The impact of miranda v arizona

FACTS: Ernesto Miranda was a Mexican immigrant living in Phoenix, Arizona. Miranda was picked out of a police lineup by a woman who accused him of kidnapping and raping her. Police questioned Miranda for two hours until he confessed to the crimes. Police never told Miranda about his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights during the interrogation. The case went to court and Miranda's confession was used against him. Miranda was convicted and sentenced to twenty to thirty years in prison. Miranda's attorney appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, they affirmed. He then appealed to the United States Supreme Court and they decided to hear the case.

ISSUE: When police interrogate individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and protection against …show more content…

RULE: The fifth amendment states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself/herself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” (www.constitution.findlaw.com) The sixth amendment states, “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 witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” (www.constitution.findlaw.com)

Show More
Related

  • Ernesto Miranda's Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    After two hours of interrogation by the police, Miranda wrote a complete confession, admitting to the kidnapping and rape of an eighteen-year-old girl ten days earlier. Alvin Moore was assigned to represent Miranda at his trial which began June 20th, in front of Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Yale McFate. It was pointed out that Miranda had not been informed of his Fifth Amendment right to have an attorney present during police questioning. Despite that he had not been informed of his rights, Miranda was convicted, forcing him to appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. The charges as well as the verdict remained the same. Miranda appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in June of 1965. Criminal Defense Attorney John Flynn agreed to represent Miranda in Alvin Moore’s stead. The Supreme Court agreed that the written confession was not acceptable evidence because of Ernesto’s ignorance of his Fifth Amendment rights, and the police’s failure to inform him of them. Then state of Arizona re-tried him without the confession but with Twila Hoffman’s testimony. He was still found guilty and was sentenced to twenty to thirty years in prison, but this case set precedence for all other cases of this

    Read More

  • Dwight Dexter Case Study

    693 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Sixth Amendment states that the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. However, Dexter was in jail for 25 years since 1982, and the appeal was still in process to the Supreme Court. Also, based on the jury selection on exhibit B, document one, there were only white people in the final jury, and African Americans were struck peremptory by prosecution. Dexter did not have an impartial jury because white people may favor his opposed side due to the different race. According to Batson v. Kentucky, the USSC also determined that peremptory challenges used to exclude jurors on the basis of race could be challenged by the defendant. It was not fair for Dexter to not have the same race people as him in the jury. In addition, the Sixth Amendment also says that both federal and state courts must provide a lawyer if the accused cannot afford to hire one. Even though Dexter did have an attorney, his attorney was not organized and prepared. The adequate attorney was not as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment because he admitted that “he has not been to the crime scene, or viewed the crime scene photographs…has not viewed the prosecution’s witness list.” He had not done anything that could help defend Dexter. He didn't even call witnesses in the court to help Dexter. Strickland v. Washington also supports this because the court upheld the defendant’s conviction that his rights had been violated when his lawyer did not provide enough evidence to avoid the death

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Japanese Internment

    2436 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without being taken to court for a fair trial, but that means nothing if the people are not willing to uphold it (Fifth Amendment).

    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 Pros And Cons Of The Fifth Amendment

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is derived from the rights Americans have to not be forced to testify against themselves in a criminal case. But, the Fifth Amendment also protects against double jeopardy and gives people charged with a felony the right to a grand jury indictment (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Double jeopardy basically states that if a conviction or acquittal was reached in a criminal case, the person can no longer be tried again for the same offense (Bohm & Haley, 2011). The procedural rights for self-incrimination are also applied to any custodial situations the police conduct. To ensure that statements, or confessions a suspect makes are allowed in court there is a two-prong tests that should be followed. First, is the person considered to be in a custodial situation and two, are the police intending to ask incriminating questions. If yes is the answers to both then the suspect must be read his or her rights. This is known as giving someone his or her Miranda rights derived from the famous case

    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

  • The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment

    2077 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth-Amendment to many American citizens and law makers is considered abstract. The complexity of this concept can easily be traced back to its beginning in which it lacked an easily identifiable principle. Since its commencement in 1789 the United States Judicial system has had a hard time interpreting and translating this vague amendment. In many cases the courts have gone out of their way to protect the freedoms of the accused. The use of three major Supreme Court disputes will show the lengths these Justices have gone through, in order to preserve the rights and civil liberties of three criminals, who were accused of heinous crimes and in some cases were supposed to face up to a lifetime in federal prison.

    Read More

  • Law Enforcement and Miranda Warnings Case Analysis

    1070 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...e of criminal court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings. Especially in custodial interrogations when being questioned by law enforcement while in custody or deprived of freedom of action. The court made it very clear that the defendant has to be warned prior to any questioning so they fully understand they have the right to remain silent and the right to counsel being present. They also need to understand that if they cannot afford counsel one will be appointed to them by the courts before any questioning. The Supreme Court reversed the cases Miranda, Vignera, Westover and then affirmed the Stewart case in California.

    Read More

  • Criminal Investigations, In Custody and Miranda Warnings

    664 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nolo Law for All (2013). Miranda Rights What happens if Police Don’t Read your Rights.

    Read More

  • Fifth Amendment Essay

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ained in their questioning. Officers commonly have small cards with the Miranda warnings on them so they don’t forget or skip over a part of ones right, if this does occur evidence still cannot be properly obtained because the person was not fully warned of all their rights. Currently, the only unwarned questioning that can occur is if the officer believes the public is in some type of danger. For example, if police come across a man standing in a convenience store that fits the description of recent thefts in a nearby neighborhood and the man runs once police confront him and is later caught and searched, when upon the search they realize he has an empty shoulder holster. In this scenario the public is in potential danger, the police can ask him where the gun is hidden without reading the man his rights and it would not be violating his Fifth Amendment rights.

    Read More

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

    1148 Words  | 3 Pages

    Ernesto Miranda Ernesto Arturo Miranda was born in Mesa, Arizona on March 9, 1941. During his grade school years, Miranda began getting into trouble. His first criminal conviction was during his eighth grade year. The following year, now a 9th grade dropout, he was convicted of burglary. His sentence was a year in the reform school, Arizona State Industrial School for Boys (ASISB).

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights

    1348 Words  | 3 Pages

    Miranda v Arizona went all the way to the Supreme Court. There the Supreme Court ruled that the police do have a responsibility to inform a subject of an interrogation of their constitutional rights. The constitutional rights have to do with self-incrimination, and the right to counsel before, during and after questioning.

    Read More

  • Power Of Judicial Review: Miranda V. Arizona

    1014 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the Judicial Branch’s many powers is the power of judicial review. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court to decide whether or not the other branches of governments’ actions are constitutional or not. This power is very important because it is usually the last hope of justice for many cases. This also allows the court to overturn lower courts’ rulings. Cases like Miranda v. Arizona gave Miranda justice for having his rules as a citizen violated. The court evalutes whether any law was broken then makes their ruling. Also, the Weeks v. United States case had to be reviewed by the court because unlawful searches and siezures were conducted by officers. One of the most famous cases involving judicial review was the Plessey v. Ferguson

    Read More

  • Essay On Exclusionary Rule

    530 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to the Sixth Amendment a defendant has the right to counsel, the right to know the nature of their crimes, the right to a speedy trial, a fair jury, and the chance to confront the witnesses accusing the defendant of a crime. When a defendant isn’t given the right to counsel or when a defendant isn’t properly Mirandized, any and all evidence obtained becomes inadmissible in court. The Exclusionary rule also comes into play with the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment gives the individual the right to a grand jury, forbids double jeopardy, and the right not to self-incriminate. Therefore, when a defendant is coerced into a confession this confession could be thrown out in

    Read More

  • Ernesto Miranda V. Arizona

    1501 Words  | 4 Pages

    Ernesto Miranda grew up not finishing high school. He didn’t finish the 9th grade, and he decided to drop out of school during that year. He also had a criminal record and had pronounced sexual fantasies after dropping out of high school. Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix in 1963. He had raped an 18 yr. girl who was mildly mentally handicapped in March of 1963. He was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. When he was found and arrested, and he was not told of his rights before interrogation. After two hours of interrogation, the cops and detectives had a written confession from Miranda that he did do the crimes that he was acquitted for. Miranda also had a history mental instability, and had no counsel at the time of the trial. The prosecution at the trial mainly used his confession as evidence. Miranda was convicted of both counts of rape and kidnapping. He was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. He tried to appeal to the Supreme Court in

    Read More

More about Miranda V. Case Study

Open Document