Supreme Court CaseBy: Zayra Rendon 2nd

Standard

SSCG16 The student will demonstrate knowledge of the operation of the federal judiciary.

Court Case

Miranda v. Arizona

The Cause of the Case

Ernesto Miranda lived in Arizona as a poor man in 1963. A woman accused him of committing a crime against her. Within two hours, he was arrested and questioned about the crime.

Amendments Violated

In the United States, people accused of crimes have only certain rights granted from the constitution. The 15th amendment states that we have the

right to remain silent. The 16th amendment states that we have the

right to have a lawyer to defend ourselves.

Summary of the Case

When Miranda was arrested, the police did not state that Miranda had those rights. After being questioned, Miranda signed a confession. The police used his confession against him during the trial and he was convicted of the crime.

Decision of the Case in the Lowest Court

The judge decided to convict Miranda with 20 to 30 years in prison for each crime.

Supreme Court of Arizona

Miranda decided to appeal his case to the Supreme Court in Arizona. His attorney stated that his confession shouldn’t have been used against because the police did not inform him of his rights, and he had no attorney present during questioning.

Decision of the Supreme Court of Arizona

The government argued that since Miranda has been convicted to multiple crimes before, he should’ve know his rights to begin with. They denied his appeal and kept the charges on Miranda.

The Supreme Court of the United States.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear Miranda’s Case. They ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that the prosecution could not continue. They could not use Miranda’s confession against him because the police failed to inform him about his rights.

The Supreme Court of the United States.

Later on, Miranda was retired and convicted without the use of his confession.

Significance of the Case

This case created the “Miranda Rights”. “The right to remain silence.” “Anything said can and will be used against the

defendant in a court of law” Today, people take for granted the

“Miranda Rights”. It’s the basic rights of the individuals that reconcile the increase in police power.

Significance of the Case Cont. The “Miranda Rights” is still in

forced. It has been upheld all these years and it’s still accepted as a valid precedent by appellate courts.