Free Essays on Miranda

Miranda v. Arizona This Supreme Court case deals with the rights of accused. This case mainly encompasses one’s Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate one’s self. Ernest Miranda, a twenty-three year old drifter was arrested and taken directly to a Phoenix, Arizona police station. There, after being identified by the victim of a rape kidnapping, he was taken to an interrogation room, where he was questioned about the crimes. At first, Miranda maintained his innocence, but after two hours of questioning, the police emerged from the room with a signed written confession of guilt. At his trial, the written confession was admitted into evidence and Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. The United States Supreme Court was then faced with Miranda’s claim that the confession was self-incrimination and in violation of his constitutional rights. The police’s admission that neither before nor during the questioning had Miranda had been advised of his right to consult wi th an attorney before answering any questions or his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation solidified Miranda’s argument. The Court decided that prosecutors could not use statements stemming from interrogation unless proper procedure, such as the notification to the accused of his right to refuse to answer the questions given by the police and his right to have an attorney present, the ruling was in favor of Miranda; 5-4. The decision of the Miranda case has three parts, which have changed the procedures of police stations across the United States. The Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings from being coerced to incriminate themselves. The privilege also applies to questioning after the accused has been taken in to custody. The Court also ruled that a confession by the accused could only be admitted if it is voluntary and no coercion ... Free Essays on Miranda Free Essays on Miranda Miranda v. Arizona This Supreme Court case deals with the rights of accused. This case mainly encompasses one’s Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate one’s self. Ernest Miranda, a twenty-three year old drifter was arrested and taken directly to a Phoenix, Arizona police station. There, after being identified by the victim of a rape kidnapping, he was taken to an interrogation room, where he was questioned about the crimes. At first, Miranda maintained his innocence, but after two hours of questioning, the police emerged from the room with a signed written confession of guilt. At his trial, the written confession was admitted into evidence and Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. The United States Supreme Court was then faced with Miranda’s claim that the confession was self-incrimination and in violation of his constitutional rights. The police’s admission that neither before nor during the questioning had Miranda had been advised of his right to consult wi th an attorney before answering any questions or his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation solidified Miranda’s argument. The Court decided that prosecutors could not use statements stemming from interrogation unless proper procedure, such as the notification to the accused of his right to refuse to answer the questions given by the police and his right to have an attorney present, the ruling was in favor of Miranda; 5-4. The decision of the Miranda case has three parts, which have changed the procedures of police stations across the United States. The Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings from being coerced to incriminate themselves. The privilege also applies to questioning after the accused has been taken in to custody. The Court also ruled that a confession by the accused could only be admitted if it is voluntary and no coercion ...