Miranda Vs. Arizona Case Study

The United States has attempted to make efforts through trial and error to enact rules and regulations in order to protect and govern its citizens. The sole purpose of the Supreme Court in our society is to interpret the law and to have the final say in a case. For example, an investigation led to a man who they believe is a killer who murdered two victims .The courts held a second trial, the prosecutor tried to introduce evidence of the accused being “silent.” The prosecutor hopes to convince the jury that because he is silent, he is guilty of the crime. The prosecution tries to allude to the fact by making an assumption that the man is guilty of the crime.
Precedent Cases As our country continues to advance and more complicated cases are appealed and presented to the Supreme Court, the justices turn to other cases to come to with a decision regarding the case. As such, in the case of Miranda vs. Arizona (1966), Miranda was arrested at his home and taken into custody for questioning. The interrogation lasted for two hours and the complaining witness identified Miranda as the suspect. As a result, Miranda signed a written confession. At trial when the information was presented to the jury, they found Miranda of kidnapping and rape and was …show more content…
In the case of Miranda vs. Arizona, Mr. Miranda was not aware of his rights, therefore he was acquitted of the charges they were going to give him. However, in Salina vs. Texas (2013) his rights were essentially violated because not only was he not told of his rights, but because he was silent the prosecution wanted to use that as evidence against him. Being silent should not be used to determine someone’s guilt and nor should that person testify against that. As our society continues to expand and as the laws get interpreted and implemented into our society, we are taking steps to protect the rights and interest of our