The Fifth Amendment and Miranda v. Arizona

1498 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Fifth Amendment: Miranda V. Arizona

“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.

The court argued that the case was not about whether Miranda was guilty of the charges or not (he obviously confessed). Rather they argued that the case was about the way in which the interrogation was derived. The court’s ruling was meant to deal with the mistreatment of suspects by policemen during interrogation. Policemen are notorious for mistreating interrogents (alovardohistory). Prior to this case a possible witness was beaten, kicked, and was burned on the back with lighted cigarette butts just in order to extract a testimony. The Supreme Court determined that the accused must be read the following rights: “You have the right to remain silent. Any...

... middle of paper ...

... right to remain silent.”

Works Cited

"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2014.

http://www.streetlaw.org/en/Page/469/Key_Excerpts_from_the_Dissenting_Opinion

"Criminal Procedure and the Supreme Court: A Guide to the Major Decisions on ..." Google Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2014.

Warren, Chief Justice Earl. "Miranda v. Arizona." (1966).

http://www.alvaradohistory.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/2mirandavarizona.1134136.pdf

"Criminal Procedure and the Supreme Court: A Guide to the Major Decisions on ..." Google Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2014.
http://books.google.com/books?id=LzrlcPVUX2EC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Criminal+Procedure+and+the+Supreme+Court&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qzAZU86EFYWCyQHUt4CwCA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Criminal%20Procedure%20and%20the%20Supreme%20Court&f=false

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

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

    1148 Words  | 3 Pages

    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 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 dictates the need for potential alternatives to the limitations of Miranda that would simultaneously protect the interest of society in effective law enforcement while at the same time providing protection to suspects against unconstitutional force (www.ncpa.org).

    Read More

  • Amanda Knox and Italy's Legal System

    896 Words  | 2 Pages

    Abadinsky, Howard. Law and Justice: An Introduction to the American Legal System. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.

    Read More

  • Loving v. Virginia (388 U.S. 1)

    2066 Words  | 5 Pages

    Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Case: Tinker V. Des Moines Independent Community School District

    550 Words  | 2 Pages

    "Summary of the Decision." Landmark Cases Of The U.S Supreme Court. Street Law, Inc, n.d. Web. 1 Nov. 2013. .

    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

  • 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

  • Miranda vs. Arizona

    396 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Individual rights did not change with the Miranda 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 a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning, anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law. The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects.

    Read More

  • Essay On Des Moines Independent Community Schools

    579 Words  | 2 Pages

    Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Abolishing The Death Penalty

    1653 Words  | 4 Pages

    “ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights Must be Read

    543 Words  | 2 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 a right to an attorney. If you can not afford an attorney one will be appointed to you” This may be differ from state to state as long as the concept is conveyed they was read their rights. Miranda Rights is mandatory across the United States due to the Miranda v. Arizona. In the following will explain what the 3 branches Judicial, Executive, and the Legislative have done to enforce this law or to change it, as well as the effect on the people.

    Read More

  • The Second Challenge: Imperial Judiciary

    1279 Words  | 3 Pages

    Jost, Kenneth. "The Federal Judiciary." CQ Researcher 8.10 (1998). CQ Researcher. SAGE Publications. Web. 01 Mar. 2011. .

    Read More

  • Restraint and Activism

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.

    Read More

  • Procedural Vs. Procedural And Substantive Due Process

    3020 Words  | 7 Pages

    Wasserman, R. (2004). Procedural Due Process: A Reference guide to the United States Constitution. Wesport:

    Read More

  • Direct Intention vs Oblique Intention

    1925 Words  | 4 Pages

    Criminal law and procedure cases ( No date). Regina v Maloney. http://www.vanuatu.usp.ac.fj/courses/la205_criminal_law_and_procedure_1/cases/R_v_Moloney.html. Accessed at 6/11/10.

    Read More

More about The Fifth Amendment and Miranda v. Arizona

Open Document