Miranda V. Arizona

Paper Rating: Word Count: 699 Approx Pages: 3

384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966)

Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape. The victim identified Miranda in a police lineup. After two hours of interrogation room, the police come forward with a signed confession from Miranda. He was convicted and sentenced to 20-30 years. Police did not inform Miranda of 5th amendment right against self-incrimination and of his 6th amendment right to attorney. Miranda confessed in writing to the crimes

The officers admitted at trial that Miranda was not advised that he had a right to have an attorney present. At his trial before a jury, the written confession was admitted into evidence over the objection of defense counsel, and the officers testified to the prior oral confession made by Miranda during the interrogation. Miranda was found guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20 to 30 years' imprisonment on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.

Miranda appealed case to Arizona Supreme Court, arguing that his confession should be excluded because he had not been informed of his rights. Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal and upheld his conviction

5th amendment protects against self-incrimination

Police must warn suspects of certain rights before starting a custodial interrogation

If these procedures are not followed, the prosecution at a trial cannot use any damaging admissions by suspects

The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory, stemming from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way, unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination.

The prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory, stemming from

This Essay is Approved by Our Editor

Page 1 of 3 Next >

Related Essays