Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Miranda vs. Arizona
2
Video
Miranda v. Arizona
Ruling Court
United States Supreme Court
June 13, 1966
DATE
Ernesto Miranda was a suspect in a kidnapping and rape case during the 1960's.
In March of 1963, an 18 year old woman was walking home after working late at a movie house. Ernesto Miranda, who was 24 at the time, saw the woman and proceeded to "drag her into his car, tied her hands behind her back and forced her to lay down in the backseat." Ernesto then drove 20 minutes out of the city and then raped her. He then demanded money from her and then drove back to the city and dropped her a few blocks away from her house.Ernesto was interrogated by officers for over two hours before signing a written confession. The written document included general acknowledgement that he knew his legal rights. Miranda's attorney stated that no one informed him of his legal rights. The case ended with Cheif Justice Earl Worren instructing police to tell the accused individual of their right to an attorney and self incrimination before proceeding with questioning.
Case Summary
Amendments Violated
Amendments
5th Amendment
5th
Miranda's fifth amendment right was violated when his rights failed to be listed. The Fifth Amendment offers protection against self incrimidation and double jeopardy, right to a jury trial, and the right to a fair trail.
Sixth Amendment
6th
Additionally, the Sixth Amendment was also violated which protects the right of any criminal defendants. Under this amendment citizens have the right to a trial without unnecessary delay, right to a lawyer, right to an impartial jury, and the right to know your accusers as well as the nature of your charges/evidence against you.
Consensus
Our group felt that the ruling of the Supreme Court was fair and justified, despite Miranda's Fifth and Sixth Amendment consistutional rights being violated. Miranda was entitled to these rights and the police officers failed to respect these amendments. This rulling ultimatly led to officers explicitly stating a persons rights when any arrest is occuring in the future. This means you are now informed of your right to an attorney and against self incrimination, these are otherwise known as Miranda rights.
Group consensus
Citations
The Supreme Court . expanding civil rights . landmark cases . Miranda v. Arizona (1966): PBS. The Supreme Court . Expanding Civil Rights . Landmark Cases . Miranda v. Arizona (1966) | PBS. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2023, from https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_miranda.html
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Sixth amendment. Legal Information Institute. Retrieved March 26, 2023, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment#:~:text=The%20Sixth%20Amendment%20guarantees%20the,charges%20and%20evidence%20against%20you.
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Fifth amendment. Legal Information Institute. Retrieved March 26, 2023, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment#:~:text=In%20criminal%20cases%2C%20the%20Fifth,and%20protects%20against%20self%2Dincrimination.