Supreme Court Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona 1963

Improved Essays
Miranda vs Arizona 1963

Miranda vs Arizona is one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions in United States history. On March 13, 1963 a man kidnapped a young girl from her job at a movie theater; he then took her to the Arizona desert where he raped her, robbed her and then proceeded to drop her off a few blocks from her home in Phoenix, Arizona. Ernesto Miranda, the convicted criminal, had a long previous record that included crimes such as armed robbery, as well as a juvenile record that included attempted rape, assault, and burglary. Miranda was found shortly after the crimes and was brought in for questioning. While in interrogation Miranda wrote a confession claiming that he was making the “statement voluntarily and of my own free will, with no threats, coercion, or promises of immunity, and with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any
…show more content…
This claim was questioned greatly and first went to the Arizona Supreme court, then proceeded to go to the US Supreme court. The ending decision of this case led to Ernesto Miranda receiving life in prison and the Miranda rights to be put in place in law enforcement. The supreme court case of Miranda vs Arizona is one of the most controversial court cases in American history but it is also one of the most celebrated because of the increase of civil rights for suspected criminals. Ernesto Miranda’s Arizona trial began on June 20th of 1963. Miranda went into the trail with the claim that the police officers who brought him in did not specify that he had the right to stay quiet, even at one point saying that the policemen, Officer Cooley and Young,

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Appellant V Luis Ortiz

    • 334 Words
    • 2 Pages

    requirements of Miranda or whether the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his rights”. (wicourts.gov) STATE of Iowa, Appellant, v. Luis Fernando ORTIZ, Appellee, This case was filed in the Supreme Court of Iowa and was decided in 2009. On July 15, 2006, a woman called the Sioux City Police Department to report that Luis Ortiz, who she hired to do remodeling work in her house, “had forced her seven-year-old daughter to touch his penis”. After a brief meeting with Ortiz Detective Bertrand asked ortiz is he was willing to go to the police station with him for an interview. Once both arrived to the police station Detective Bertrand and Salvador Sanchez, a Sioux City officer, acting as translator, handed Ortiz a Voluntary Waiver of Rights…

    • 334 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The criminal has the privilege to have a sensible safeguard set for the wrongdoing he or she perpetrated and as indicated by the genuine flight hazard which he or she may force. In 1963 a man known as Ernesto Arturo Miranda was captured of charges he actually admited nightfall of interrigation, and was sentenced, and sentenced 20-30 years. Miranda's court apointed lawyer contended taht he was not educated he has a privilege to insight, and his admission was not volontary. The Arizona Incomparable Court ruled upon this case, and announced that Miranda was unconscious of the rights allowed under the fifth amendent's self implication provision, and the sixth alterations right to a lawyer.…

    • 683 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Name and Citation: The name of the case if Salinas v. Texas Salinas is the plaintiff; the State of Texas is the defendant. 12-246 410 US 113 (1973) Decided June 16, 2013 Facts: On the morning of December 18, 1992, Houston police found two brothers that were shot and killed that led officers to initiated an investigation that led them to Genovevo Salinas, Petitioner, who voluntarily to interview with the officer for questioning and was not read his Miranda rights because he was not arrest at the time and all parties agreed the interview was noncustodial. Salinas answered all of the officers questions until one officer asked if his gun found at the crime scene would match the gun found in Salinas’ home. At the point Salinas remained silent and…

    • 392 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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.…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 1577 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Miranda vs Arizona In the years following Miranda v. Arizona, many changes were made to the verdict. The Omnibus Crime and Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 declared that if a suspect voluntarily confessed to a crime within six hours after his or her arrest, this confession could be used as valid evidence in a trial, even if the suspect had not been informed of his or her Miranda rights. The passage of this act was one of the first major modifications to the initial decision. Additionally, there were many other cases that followed Miranda v. Arizona that altered the Miranda decision.…

    • 1577 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    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").…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Fare V. Arizona 1979

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the case of Fare v. Michael C. (1979), the United States Supreme Court rejected the California Supreme Court’s position that a juvenile's request to see his probation officer constitutes an invocation of the right to remain silent within the context of Miranda v. Arizona (1966). Sixteen year old Michael C. was taken into custody by the Van Nuys, California police department on suspicion of murder. After being advised of his Maranda rights, and acknowledging he understood them, he was asked if he wanted an attorney. His response was, “Can I have my probation officer here?” (Page 442 U. S. 710).…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    2012 Dbq Analysis

    • 872 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In contrast, the government made more considerable efforts to reshape American democratic ideals. During this time, the government had the ability to enact changes as reactions to the objectives of other groups seeking to redefine these ideas, however, it often recognized the lack of social and economic equality for all groups and approached reform during this era broadly so that many minority groups became democratically equal to the majority. For example, many politicians recognized the need for new policies and thus directed their political agenda to conceiving and instituting such legislation. According to Robert F. Kennedy in his speech announcing his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President, he recognized that the United…

    • 872 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Arizona (1966). This decision, generally speaking, defined the rights of the accused after an appeal was made on behalf of Ernesto Miranda. It said, among other things, that each person accused of a crime has the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney (Document 7). The tradition of these Miranda rights has become common knowledge in American society, despite the fact that some people believe that they are generally too lenient and often hamper the justice system’s ability to convict guilty criminals of their crimes (Documents 5a & 5b). The Supreme Court has failed to see adequate need for reversal of this decision, despite the dramatic odds that lie in favour of the accused as a result of the decision, and the fact that the victim is often left without help when the offender is not convicted.…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Miranda warning that arose from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision assures that officers assure that those arrested are aware of their rights that protect against self-incrimination prior to any questioning. The ruling in Miranda does fulfill the legal tradition of the promise against self-incrimination and protects against the pressures of authority. The Miranda rights fulfills the legal tradition of the promise against self-incrimination because they protect against wrongful punishment and torture employed by authorities. Authorities can abuse their power in order to gain info or prove their suspicions correct.…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The court in Miranda v Arizona found that police use other forms of coercion during interrogation such leaving the suspect alone in a room; this was found to be inherently coercive. If Miranda rights are not given during interrogation, the fruits or what the interrogation sought to achieve including a confession are inadmissible and invalid (Gaines and Miller…

    • 59 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The case posed questions regarding the conduct of an inmate who participated in assisting fellow prisoners in planning the appeals for a writ of habeas corpus and any other legal papers. The amendment in scrutiny was the 28 U.S.C ~ 2242 that violates such prisoner actions. C. 384 US 436 (1966) Miranda v. Arizona Argued 2/28/66; 3/1/66; 3/2/66 Decided Jun 13, 1966 On March 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested for the allegations of rape and kidnapping.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Your miranda rights can hurt your case but they can also help. Ernesto Arturo Miranda March 9, 1941 January 31, 1976 was a laborer whose conviction on…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Miranda Rights Case Study

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It is well-known fact that the release of miranda rights have brought a hard time to America Legitimate law enforcement, because the law required they to inform suspects who are being arrested that they do not have to answer any questions while in interrogation, which largely limited chance of criminal investigator to obtain admissible statements from criminal suspects, that is, this constitutional rights have given the police office a hard time to get a potential suspect to confess to a crime. Therefore, the court have utilized some loophole of Miranda rights to reduce the impact cause by this constitutional rights to law enforcement. these loophole involved voluntary station house interrogation which performs by invited suspect into the station house to talk without against suspect’s willing, and at the outset of the conversation, police usually would tell suspect something like you’re not under arrest and you’re free to leave at any time you want. For example, It’s happened in following cases- Stansbury v. California, Oregon v. Mathiason, California v. Beheler, respectively, and what is usually happen is police would change his or her mind to arrest suspect right after suspect confesses to the crime in oral conversation, and Miranda rights doesn’t get inform to suspect here, because the suspect is willing to be invited by police to station house to have little conversation with investigator under the condition of not been arrest, Therefore, it’s not necessary for…

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Arizona in 1966. In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested for various serious crimes. He was not informed of his rights before the police interrogation in which he supposedly gave a recorded confession to the crimes. He also did not have a counsel present. Miranda was found guilty of his crimes solely on the basis of his confession.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays