Miranda Vs Arizona Research Paper

Imagine being arrested based on zero evidence to accuse you of a crime and at the very same time being forced to answer intimidating questions that could be used against you. Miranda v. Arizona is an iconic court case that created a large impact on racial discrimination and even how arrests would be made. It started in 1963 when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona. He was in custody for rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Ernesto Miranda appealed with the Arizona Supreme Court claiming that the police had unconstitutionally received his confessions. He was arrested in 1963 and had his case was reviewed in 1966. The confession he told could not be used as evidence because the police officers who arrested him did not read him his right to an attorney and self-incrimination. …show more content…
The Miranda warning includes what rights we have when we are being arrested or interrogated. Police officers or other law enforcement officers must tell a person their Miranda rights during an arrest. After the warning is given to someone being arrested, the person also has the right to speak to an attorney. These rights became a part of the Fifth and Six amendments that already existed in our U.S. Constitution.
The Fifth Amendment says that no one can be accused of a crime unless a grand jury decides that there is enough evidence to charge a person for a crime in court. The defendant has a choice to testify or not to testify. If they choose to testify, the defendant loses his Fifth Amendment privilege and must answer the questions asked. However, at the trial the defendant who has been called to the witness stand by the grand jury can refuse to answer certain