Nobody downloaded yet

Miranda v. Arizona 1966 - Term Paper Example

Comments (0) Cite this document
The author of the paper examines the case where an undercover officer is not required to read out the Miranda Warning because it may jeopardize his own safety if he reveals that he is linked to the law or that he is an officer. So the rule of the Miranda Warning is not absolute…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER97.4% of users find it useful
Miranda v. Arizona 1966
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample "Miranda v. Arizona 1966"

Download file to see previous pages When in the trial, the lawyer representing Miranda objected to the confessional statement because the confession that Miranda had made was not made voluntarily. Miranda was still convicted of rape and kidnapping because of the evidence that had been found against him. In result, the lawyer filed for an appeal in which he stated that the confession that had been made was not voluntary and should not have been included in the court trial.
Questions from legal authorities came up about whether or not a confession is acceptable in the court if it has been taken without the warnings of what he says might result to him getting in more trouble or the rights that the suspect is given in such situations according to the 5th and 6th amendments. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966)). Also about what the general standard of judging confessions has become. Miranda was cleared violated of his 5th amendment right to remain silent and the 6th amendment which was the right to have legal counsel. The confessions were illegally obtained and should have been discarded. That led to the conviction being faulty and that Miranda should have gotten a re-trial.
Chief Justice Warren declared that the state should have used the proper procedure before sentencing the suspect. Because of not having used a proper channel to get the confessions, Warren states that they could easily be discarded according to the law. The suspect should always be able to not incriminate himself in such a situation. Miranda was not given his legal rights and was not allowed to consult with an attorney during the time of interrogation. Without these rights, his statement which even had the typed in a clause that he was responsible and knew entirely of his legal rights was inadmissible. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966)). Miranda had the right to the presence of an attorney and if he could not afford one then one would be appointed to him before any of the questionings began if he desired. ...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
(Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words, n.d.)
Miranda v. Arizona 1966 Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words. Retrieved from
(Miranda V. Arizona 1966 Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words)
Miranda V. Arizona 1966 Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words.
“Miranda V. Arizona 1966 Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words”, n.d.
  • Cited: 0 times
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment or rate a document

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Miranda v. Arizona 1966

Miranda v. Arizona

...?Miranda vs. Arizona In 1963, Ernesto Arturo Miranda was arrested in connection with the kidnapping and rape of an eighteen-year-old woman. After being questioned relentlessly by police officers, though with no counsel present, Miranda signed a voluntary confession form stating that he was guilty. While at trial, his lawyer pointed out that Miranda had not been read his rights; therefore, the confession was not signed voluntarily and should not be used as evidence. The attorney’s objection was overruled and Miranda was imprisoned for his crimes. In 1966, Miranda appealed to the Supreme Court, who ruled in...
2 Pages(500 words)Thesis

Miranda v. Arizona

..., based from his written confession. Later, the U.S. Supreme Court repealed the conviction and ordered the suppression of Miranda’s signed rape confession (Mason & Stephenson, 2007). The Court ruled that “the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination” (Warren, 1966) and the Sixth Amendment right to a legal counsel (Mason & Stephenson, 2007). This rule is what is now famously known as the ‘Miranda Warning.” This paper will discuss the Miranda...
7 Pages(1750 words)Essay

Arizona v. Gant

...?CASE REPORT Arizona v. Gant Facts: A certain Rodney Gant was charged for the possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia. The Arizona police officersthen signaled for his arrest because he failed to appear before the court. Gant is supposed to be arrested when the police arrived in his house but he could not be found. Meanwhile, in his house were two persons and one of them was caught in his possession with a crack pile. The Arizona police officers who responded thought Gant has discerned their arrival but found him at his house driveway. An officer shone a flashlight in his hand over the car and saw Gant in it. When Gant saw the police officer, he voluntarily vacates the said car (“Arizona v. Gant,” n.d.). Meanwhile, the officer... ...
6 Pages(1500 words)Essay

Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

...with a vote of 5-4 that the statements the police acquired from Miranda were not admissible in court because they failed to advise him of his rights as a police detainee (“Miranda V. Arizona (1966)”, n.d.). This decision became the precedent case for Westover v. United States, Vignera v. New York, and California v. Stewart which were all cases that were all decided on the basis of what became known as the Miranda Rights. So named after Ernesto Miranda, whose case became the landmark case that brought the rights of a police detainee to light. Miranda...
4 Pages(1000 words)Case Study

Miranda vs. Arizona

...Miranda vs. Arizona The landmark Supreme Court decision of Miranda vs. Arizona has been one of themost debated and widely discussed court cases in history. By the time any American reaches adulthood, they are familiar with the Miranda Rights from the steady stream of crime dramas on television. We know we have the right to remain silent and have a right to an attorney. Yet, the Miranda decision was far more reaching than the few principles that are read from a card. It reaches back into history to establish a precedent and presents ongoing dilemmas as it faces new challenges for the courts and law enforcement. Up until the time of the...
5 Pages(1250 words)Essay

A landmark case: Miranda v. Arizona

...of the of the of the Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Miranda v Arizona emerged as a landmark case, in the context of a suspected person’s rights during custodial interrogations by the police. The ruling in this case, generated considerable nationwide debate on this subject. The facts of the case were that the plaintiff, Ernest Miranda, was suspected of rape and robbery. These crimes had taken place ten days prior to his arrest. The police went to his home and asked him to accompany them to the police station for inquiry. Miranda was unsure, as to whether he could refuse to...
14 Pages(3500 words)Essay

Roe v. Wade or Miranda v. Arizona

...4 November 2009 Miranda v. Arizona Miranda v. Arizona Ernesto Miranda was arrested by Arizona’s police onthe charges of kidnapping and rapping. Miranda, on March 13, 1963, admitted to three crimes. Miranda’s confession statement which was duly signed by him contained a paragraph at the top that it was a voluntary confession, made without any assurance of protection or threats and “with complete familiarity of his legal privileges, including any declaration which he made might be employed against him. Later, Miranda’s admission was allowed into testimony...
4 Pages(1000 words)Essay

Miranda v. Arizona inform Miranda of his legitimate right to not to be compelled to incriminate himself during the interrogation (Miranda v Arizona , 1966). Thus, the Supreme Court clearly held that in the absence of the fulfillment of these requirements, the statements procured from Miranda were inadmissible as evidence. The police should have followed the legal procedures, while obtaining evidence from Miranda, if it was to be admissible in the court. The Supreme Court held that the typed statement from Miranda that he had full knowledge of his constitutional rights, did not waive his constitutional rights (Case...
2 Pages(500 words)Essay

Arizona v. Gant (2009)

...Case Brief Case Brief And Citation Arizona V. Gant Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S.Ct. 1710, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009) Facts In this case the defendant, Gant was arrested in the state of Arizona on the charges of driving under a suspended driving license. Gant was arrested in his friend’s yard after parking his car. He and other suspects were secured and the vehicle owned by Gant was searched upon which the police obtained a gun along with cocaine and therefore he was charged for possessing and selling drugs. Issue The issue of the case was whether a warrantless search conducted by police after securing all the suspects is allowed or not because a...
1 Pages(250 words)Essay

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and Dickeson v. U.S. (2000)

... and transparency in their awarding of their judgments. This is because justice must be seen as served to the parties in the most professional way possible based on the facts in a given case. A case study of the Miranda v. Arizona case in 1966 and Dickerson v. U.S. case in 2000 reveals that the Supreme Court did not reverse their ruling or rather their decision. Judges ideologies helped a big deal in reaching the ruling, because judges had to explore different options for them to stay the ruling or reverse it altogether. When rights of suspects and how police do their prosecutions comes into discussion, it changes the approach to the whole story. Judges have to look deeper in the case to understand every single detailed based... if the...
2 Pages(500 words)Term Paper
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.

Let us find you another Term Paper on topic Miranda v. Arizona 1966 for FREE!

Contact Us