Significance of miranda v arizona VideoMiranda v. Arizona Summary - rectoria.unal.edu.co
Significance of miranda v arizona - opinionView Citing Opinions. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Project , a federally-recognized c 3 non-profit. We rely on donations for our financial security. Donate Now. Sign In Register. Filed: April 14th, significance of miranda v arizona
Miranda v. Arizona was a significant Supreme Court case that ruled that a defendant's statements to authorities are inadmissible in court unless the defendant has been informed of their right to have an attorney present during questioning and an understanding that anything they say will be held against them.
In addition, for a statement to be admissible, the individual must understand their rights and waive them voluntarily.
Please Sign In or Register
On March 2,Patricia McGee not her real name was kidnapped and raped while walking home after work in Phoenix, Arizona. She accused Ernesto Miranda of the crime after picking him out of a lineup.
He was arrested and taken to an interrogation room where after three hours he signed a written confession to the crimes. The paper on which he wrote his confession stated that the information was given voluntarily and that he understood his rights. However, no specific rights were listed on the paper. Miranda was found guilty in an Arizona court based largely on the written confession. He was sentenced to od to 30 years for both crimes to be served concurrently.
However, his attorney felt that his confession should not be admissible due to the fact that he was not warned of his right to have an attorney represent him or that his statement could be used against him. Therefore, he appealed the case for Miranda.
sifnificance The Arizona State Supreme Court did not agree that the confession had been coerced, and therefore upheld the conviction. From there, his attorneys, with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union, appealed to the U. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court actually decided four different cases that all had similar circumstances when they ruled on Miranda. At first, the attorneys for Miranda attempted to argue that his rights had been violated as he had not been given an attorney during the confession, citing the Sixth Amendment.
However, the Court focused on the rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment including that of protection against significance of miranda v arizona. He was retried for the crimes of rape and kidnapping without the written evidence and found guilty a second time. The Supreme Court decision in Mapp v. Ohio was quite controversial. Opponents argued that advising criminals of their rights would hamper police investigations and cause more criminals to walk free.
In http://rectoria.unal.edu.co/uploads/tx_felogin/benjamin-franklin-s-theory-of-life-and/social-network-history.php, Congress passed a law in that provided the ability for courts to examine confessions on a case-by-case basis to decide whether they should be allowed. The main result of Miranda v. Arizona was the creation of the " Miranda Rights. Share Flipboard Email. Issues The U. Government U. Foreign Policy U. Liberal Politics U.]