Miranda Argumentative Essay

Imagine standing in front of the Supreme Court demanding for them to change the law so that you can have your own personal rights, and having them listen to you and grant your demand for the good of the country. This is the experience of Ernesto Miranda and his case against Arizona. Miranda was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison for the kidnapping and rape of a young woman, but when he was arrested the police did not read him his constitutional rights of the 5th and 6th Amendments. They took advantage of him and forced a confession out of him during their interrogation, then used it in court to prove him guilty. He wanted to have been read his right to an attorney and his rights to remain silent, but the law enforcers did not give him that option upon his arrest. He took the case to the Supreme Court to demand his personal rights to hear his privileges as a criminal/suspect. The Supreme Court ruled in favor …show more content…
In the court trials the defendant uses the sixth amendment rights to point out Miranda’s “to have the assistance of counsel for his defence” (amend. VI). The Sixth amendment speaks of the right to a lawyer in court for the criminal, and how it is his/her specific right to representation in court, and that doesn’t affect the people outside of the case, so it does not affect the good of the citizens. Likewise, the Fifth Amendment is used a great deal in the Supreme Court trials, and it gives the right to remain silent during interrogation. This right is for private interrogation between law enforcers and the suspect, the public is not included in on this event. The rights used to win this case were specifically for the individual criminal(s) that were being interrogated and put on trial, and the public would not be affected either way, they are personal and individual