Miranda v. Arizona
Tom Johnson
&
Jessica Gerharter
Miranda v. Arizona
• The plaintiff in the case of Miranda v. Arizona
was Ernesto Miranda, who had not been told
he had the right to remain silent and had no
access to a lawyer when he was arrested for
robbery but later confessed to kidnapping
and sexual assault. Miranda, unaware of his
rights, confessed to those crimes.
Miranda v. Arizona
• Miranda had several constitution rights that
were violated.
• 5th Amendment- self incrimination clause
• 6th Amendment- right to an attorney
Verdict
• Miranda’s case went to the supreme court in
1966, where the court ruled that Miranda’s
confession could not be used as evidence.
Miranda was still prosecuted with other
witnesses and evidence. Miranda was found
guilty and sentenced to 20-30 years in jail.
Ernesto Miranda
Miranda was paroled in 1972, where he
then made a living autographing police
officer’s Miranda Cards. Miranda was
killed in a bar fight in 1976.
Impacts
• Following the Miranda court case, nations
police officers are required to read the
arrested their rights.
•
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be
used against you in the court of law. You have the right to an attorney,
and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you can not
afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.”
Subsequent Cases
• Colorado v. Connelly
• Under the Miranda rights, a suspect, must be
knowing, intelligent and voluntary when hearing
accepting his Miranda rights. The supreme court
overruled that clause, stating that is is irrelevant
to whether or not the suspect is insane at the
time.
Questions
Sources
•
•
Mount, Steve. "The Miranda Warning".
<Http://www.usconstitution.net/miranda.html >.
Picture, of Miranda. "Ernesto Miranda".
<http://www.dominickrusso.com/images/ernesto_miranda.jpg >.