Miranda Vs Arizona Essay, Research Paper
In 1966 the Supreme Court made a ruling that every American would always know and remember. The case was Miranda versus The State of Arizona.
Early in 1963, an 18-year-old woman was kidnapped and raped in Phoenix, Arizona. The police investigated the case, and soon found and arrested a poor and mentally disturbed man. The name of this man was Ernesto Miranda. Miranda was 23 years old when he was arrested. He confessed to the kidnapping and the rape after two hours of questioning. By confessing to the crime Miranda was convicted for kidnapping and rape.
However, when Miranda was arrested he was not told his rights that are stated in the 5th Amendment. On appeal, Miranda’s lawyers pointed out that the police had never told him that he had the right to a lawyer and that he could remain silent if he wished to. In addition, he was not told that everything he said could be used against him in court. In 1966, the United States Supreme Court gave support to Mirada’s appeal by a 5-4 decision that’s his rights were violated. The Supreme Courts decision detailed the principles governing police interrogation and decided that police must make certain points clear before questioning a suspect. Miranda was later convicted of the charges based on the evidence against him.
The Miranda case solely dealt with the first ten Amendments, which are also known as the “ bill of rights.” According to the 5th Amendment, anyone including foreigners arrested in the United States has certain rights and privileges that should be spelled out for them at the time of arrest. These rights are to ensure that everyone has the right to due process of the law. If any of the five points listed in the 5th Amendment are violated, the accused cannot be sentenced.
The Miranda case gave an accused person 5 basic rights, they are
1) The accused has the right to remain silent.
2) The accused must be warned that anything they say can be used against them in court.
3) The accused has the right to have an attorney present during any questioning.
4) The accused can terminate questioning at any point they want to
5) If the accused and not afford an attorney they will be provided with one.
Police officers often carry a card with the that reminds them of a suspects “Miranda Rights” and reminds them to read the suspect there rights. A police officer will often say this to a suspect. “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney if you can not afford one, one will be appointed to you, do you understand your rights?”
Комментариев на модерации: 1.