Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

Miranda vs. Arizona is one of the most crucial U.S. Supreme Court cases ever held in the United States. The case causes the Supreme Court to redefine law enforcement procedures before interrogations. The decision that was reached by the Supreme Court addressed four different cases involving custodial interrogations. All of these cases are similar in the fact that there was a custodial interrogation where the suspect was not properly informed of his constitutional rights to remain silent and have a presence of an attorney. Additionally, in all of the cases besides Stewart v. California, the conviction was affirmed without any belief that there was a violation of constitutional rights ("Facts and Case"). The first case was Miranda's case v. Arizona. In the case, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his place of residence and taken to the police …show more content…
The right to remain silent is located in Fifth Amendment, and the right to have a presence of attorney is located in the Sixth Amendment of the constitution. The Supreme Court ended up ruling that it was unconstitutional to undertake the interrogation without the warning of the rights secured by the Fifth Amendment. Additionally, the court stated that they must protect the individual from the desire to self-incriminate ("Miranda v."). The court created the Miranda Warning which is as follows: "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 cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you" (" 'Miranda' Rights"). The law enforcement personnel must warn the individual prior to any investigation using the Miranda Warning. The Miranda rights are the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, which are stated in the Miranda