Preview

Miranda Warning

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
912 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Miranda Warning
Upon the case Miranda vs. Arizona the Supreme Court decided that citizens must be aware of their fifth and sixth Amendment rights upon questioning by the police. Fifth Amendment: “…No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…” Sixth Amendment: “…In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” The Supreme Court created the Miranda warning that a police officer must read to the suspect before questioning if they wish to have the evidence obtained during the questioning used in the court of law. Miranda warning: “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 speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.” If the Miranda Warning was not read to the person in custody before questioning, any evidence obtained from the suspect during the questioning shall be
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Marbury V. Madison: (1803) Judicial Review
    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Marbury V. Madison: (1803) Judicial Review

    Arizona: (1966) Rights in custody Ernesto Miranda a man who had not completed the ninth grade was arrested at his home in Arizona and identified as a suspect ina rape-kidnapping case. When he was questioned about the crime Miranda maintained he was innocent, but after two hours of interrogation he signed a confession. At the trial the confession was admitted as evidence and the court found Miranda guilty. The police acknowledged that Miranda had not been made aware. of his rights during the process nor had he had access to legal counsel. While the Miranda confession was given with relatively little pressure it still violated the constitutional requirements that governed such procedures. Inthis case, the Warren court ruled that the accused must be made aware of his or her rights from the…

    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Study
    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Study

    The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Case Study
    • 341 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Case Study

    1. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling of Miranda v. Arizona set a precedence on how future suspects would be interrogated. It makes complete sense to advise a person that is being interrogated that he or she has a right to remain silent during interrogation and that he or she has the right to have counsel present during an interrogation. It's also important that the suspect be fully aware and full understand his or her rights before the interrogation begins. -WRITTEN AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION-METHODS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT By Harvey Wallace and Cliff Roberson(CHAPTER 9 PAGE 136)…

    • 341 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona 1966
    • 1843 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona 1966

    In 1966 Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark of a decision to the United States Supreme Court, in which this was passed because it had four out of five agreeing. The Court held both exculpatory and inculpatory statements in which was made in response to interrogation by the person who is in the custody of the police who will be used in a trial only if the prosecution is able to show that the accused was informed of their right to consult with a lawyer before and even during any questioning and have the right against…

    • 1843 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    miranda v. arizona
    • 367 Words
    • 2 Pages

    miranda v. arizona

    Supreme Court Decision: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Miranda and it also enforced the Miranda warning to be given to a person being interrogated while in the custody of the police.…

    • 367 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Research Paper
    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda Vs Arizona Research Paper

    What is miranda v. arizona? Do the miranda rights come to mind when you hear miranda v. arizona? Perhaps it does the Miranda rights came to be in 1963 when a man named ernesto miranda was accused of sexual assault towards a girl the case made it all way to the supreme court the case labeled as miranda v. arizona and ernesto was founded guilty of both kidnapping and sexual assault and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison he later then claimed the police did not read him his rights and because he wasn't given the right to remain silence his rights were violated and the case was reviewed again in 1966 because the police had failed to inform Miranda of his right to an attorney. The police duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a witness against…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Arizona vs Miranda
    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Arizona vs Miranda

    Miranda was not given a full and effective warning of his rights. He was not told of his right to remain silent and his right to counsel. Miranda was found guilty of kidnaping and rape and was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count. During the prosecution, Miranda’s court-appointed lawyer, Alvin Moore, objected that because of these facts, the confession was not truly voluntary and should be excluded. In the end of 1966, The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first informs Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court of Arizona detailed the principles governing police interrogation. Arizona ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.…

    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona Case Analysis
    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona Case Analysis

    The Fifth Amendment which in 1934 the “which protects a defendant from being compelled to be a witness against themselves” (Wright, 2013). The self-incrimination portion of the Fifth Amendment was tested case of Miranda v. Arizona. This is the same case that leads to the Miranda Warning. The Miranda warning is an “explanation of rights that must be given before any custodial interrogation” so that self-incrimination will not be a factor. No person can be compelled to openly admit to a crime. They cannot try to pry information out of someone if they have not been read their rights or if they ask for their attorney. It is a different story though is someone just starts rambling on when they are not asked. “Suspects can reinitiate an interrogation by coming forward and indicating to police they wish to talk and are willing to waive their Miranda rights. If there is a break in detention, the police may reinitiate the interrogation after fourteen days” (Wright, 2013).…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    John Adams Supreme Court Case
    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages

    John Adams Supreme Court Case

    Miranda never knew he did not have to speak with the police was interrogated and confessed and was sentenced to jail. Later an attorney looked over the case and requested Judicial Review Claiming that Ernesto’s rights has been violated. In 1966 The Supreme Court overturned Miranda’s Conviction, and ruled that if a person is going to be taken in as a suspect they must be informed that they do have a right to and attorney. The suspect also has to be informed that the do not have to speak. The supreme court also ruled that if the suspect is not informed of these right the evidence obtained before hand can not be used in court. These rights are now known as the Miranda rights.…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs. Arizona
    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda vs. Arizona

    The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The police duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a witness against himself," and Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal defendants the right to an attorney.…

    • 582 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Miranda V. Arizona
    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Miranda V. Arizona

    The case of Miranda v. Arizona dealt with the question, “Does the police practice of interrogating individuals without notifying them of their right to counsel and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?” This case started in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona for robbing $8 from a bank worker, and was charged with armed robbery. He already had a record for armed robbery, and a juvenile record including attempted rape, assault, and burglary. While Miranda was in police custody, he signed a written confession to the robbery, and also to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days before the robbery. After being convicted, Miranda’s lawyer appealed; on the basis that the defendant did not know he was protected from self-incrimination and therefore did not have to confess to his crimes.…

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Miranda Warnings
    • 260 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Miranda Warnings

    no. the miranda RIGHTS. protect our freedoms. without them we could end up a police state.In the United States, the Miranda warning is a warning given by police to criminal suspects in police custody, or in a custodial situation, before they are asked questions relating to the commission of a crime. A custodial situation is where the suspects freedom of movement is restrained although he is not under arrest. An incriminating statement by a suspect will not constitute admissible evidence unless the suspect was advised of his or her "Miranda rights" and made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of those rights. However, police may request biographical information such…

    • 260 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    What Does Miranda Rights Mean To You
    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages

    What Does Miranda Rights Mean To You

    The Miranda Rights are part of a preventative criminal procedure rule that states law enforcement are required to administer Miranda Rights to an individual who is in custody and is subject to direct questioning for a criminal violation of law. When a person is detained or taken into custodial arrest and interrogated for a criminal offense, if he or she wishes to remain silent the individual must expressly state that he or she chooses to remain silent. In addition, if the individual asserts that he or she wishes to speak to an attorney or have an attorney present, police must then cease interrogations and wait until…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Persuasive Essay On Miranda Rights
    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Persuasive Essay On Miranda Rights

    The rights you are read while being placed under arrest are the Miranda rights. They state that what you say will be used against you in court and that you have the right to an attorney. These rights are read to protect your freedom and to inform you of your constitutional rights. It became procedure to state the rights after the Miranda vs. Arizona case. Ernesto Miranda was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison for counts of kidnapping and rape. In court, Miranda argued that he did not know his rights and that they should have been told to him. He is the reason that criminal suspects receive more justice from police officers.…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Fifth Amendment
    • 494 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Fifth Amendment

    In 1966, there was a supreme case called Miranda v. Arizona which the Supreme Court ruled that the fifth amendment privilege againest self incrimination requires law enforcement to advise a suspect that before a custodial interrigation, a suspect must be informed of both his or her privileges against incriminating oneself and to obtain an attorney. Miranda warnings must be given before any questioning by law enforcement officials.…

    • 494 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More

Related Topics