Miranda Vs Arizona Supreme Court Case

Throughout the years there has been many cases in the United States that have been controversial. Although, there are only a select few of those cases that have been able to reach the top court, the Supreme Court. Even then not all of the cases that reached Supreme Court gained the status of being a landmark Supreme Court case. Each of these cases that gained the status of a landmark Supreme Court case was by embedding some type of societal impact that lasts to the United States such as, Miranda v. Arizona. In order for a case to be defined as a landmark Supreme Court case it must first reach the supreme court of the United States, then the case must be decided on by the Supreme Court, the cases must then be studied by others of its impacts
Arizona case reached its first court two weeks after Ernesto Miranda was arrested. In the court Miranda had asked the court for a counsel but was denied the counsel .Miranda was given a lawyer who tried to object the use of Miranda’s confession but he was over ruled. “Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20 to 30 years' imprisonment on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.” (Miranda v. Arizona 1966) Miranda was not satisfied with the decision, so he decided that he would appeal to the Supreme Court of Arizona. The supreme court of Arizona reviewed Ernesto A. Miranda’s plea and case, but once again, “On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona held that Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession and affirmed the conviction (Mr. Chief Justice Warren).” Miranda had been denied again by the state court this time ruling in favor that there was no errors committed in the decision of the case. Still though Miranda was adamant that he was not given the rights he deserved and stated he should have. Miranda at last appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, where they accepted to view his case know as Miranda v. Arizona along with three other cases. Majority leader chief justice Warren delivered his opinion of the court, in his opinion he states how Mr. Justice Douglas
Justice Douglas agrees with the arguments of Miranda, he was never notified of his rights ever even if there was a typed statement at the top it does not justify Miranda was read his rights. Although, the minority party consisting of Mr. Justice White, Mr. Justice Harlan, and Mr. Justice Stewart has a different opinion stating, “In two of the three cases coming from state courts, Miranda v. Arizona (No. 759) and Vignera v. New York (No. 760), the confessions were held admissible and no other errors worth comment are alleged by petitioners. I would affirm in these two cases.” (Miranda v. Arizona 1966) Mr. Justice White, Mr. Justice Harlan, and Mr. Justice Stewart agree with the decisions of both courts on their rulings of the Miranda case that there was no wrong doing and Miranda was aware of his rights when he sign the confession; therefore the confession is valid and can be used against Miranda. However, the others included in the majority party (Chief Justice Warren, Justices Black, Douglas, Brennan, and Fortas) who disagree with the idea of the minority party of affirming the case. On June 13, 1966 the Supreme Court ruled over the court case Miranda v. Arizona in favor of Miranda by a five to four vote stating that, “Miranda v. Arizona (1966)… required that custodial suspects be apprised of their Constitutional rights against self-incrimination.”( Rogers, R., Fiduccia, C. E., Robinson, E. V., Steadham, J. A., & Drogin, E. Y. 2013,